Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

15
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
67% confidence
Low manipulation indicators. Content appears relatively balanced.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
Med i bagasjen til Davos har han sitt eget fredsråd. Men hvem sjekker inn – og ut?
VG

Med i bagasjen til Davos har han sitt eget fredsråd. Men hvem sjekker inn – og ut?

President Donald Trump har invitert 60 nasjoner til å delta i sitt eget fredsråd – med varierende oppslutning. Torsdag holder presidenten en seremoni i Davos.

By Knut Eivind Straume
View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 1/5
No binary extremes forced; discusses varied responses without implying only join-or-oppose options.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 2/5
Mild us-vs-them with Trump allies like Sisi/Orban joining early vs. Western skeptics like Norway/France declining, but reported neutrally.
Simplistic Narratives 2/5
Presents peace board positively via joiners' quotes but notes skepticism; no stark good-vs-evil, e.g., 'Mange statsledere stiller seg skeptiske.'
Timing Coincidence 1/5
Timing aligns organically with WEF Davos 2026 (Jan 19-23) where Trump is speaking on related issues like Greenland and tariffs; searches confirm no suspicious correlations or distractions from major events in past 72 hours.
Historical Parallels 1/5
No resemblance to propaganda playbooks; searches found no parallels to Russian IRA, state disinfo, or astroturfing matching this event's themes or techniques.
Financial/Political Gain 1/5
Appears genuine journalism from outlets citing AFP/NTB; political benefit to Trump via peace narrative but no evidence of paid ops or specific beneficiaries beyond diplomatic norms, as confirmed by widespread reporting.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No claims that 'everyone agrees'; balances joiners like 'Saudi-Arabia, Tyrkia' with decliners like 'Norge, Sverige' and skeptics on sidelines.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 2/5
Mild X buzz with recent posts on joining countries but no manufactured trends, bots, or urgent pressure; tied to live Davos coverage without demanding belief change.
Phrase Repetition 2/5
Similar facts across outlets (e.g., joining countries, veto power, $1B fee) from shared sources like AFP draft, but diverse framing; normal for high-profile Davos story without coordination signs.
Logical Fallacies 2/5
Minor assumptions like Trump's tariff threat response, but mostly factual sequencing without flaws.
Authority Overload 1/5
Cites officials like 'amerikansk tjenestemann AFP har snakket med' and leaders without over-relying on questionable experts.
Cherry-Picked Data 3/5
Selectively lists joiners (Saudi-Arabia to Qatar) and decliners (Norge etc.); omits full 60 invitees or broader reactions.
Framing Techniques 3/5
Biased phrasing like 'truet han med å innføre 200 prosent toll' highlights drama; 'kjøpe seg en permanent plass' implies commercialization.
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
Reports dissent openly, e.g., Norway's rejection and Sweden's EU talks, without negative labels.
Context Omission 3/5
Omits full context on board's Gaza focus origins or legal implications; quotes partial statements like Støre's 'gå grundig gjennom spørsmålet.'
Novelty Overuse 1/5
No claims of unprecedented or shocking events; the Board of Peace is presented as a planned initiative with details like 'stiftelsesdokumentet' matter-of-factly.
Emotional Repetition 1/5
Emotional words absent and not repeated; focus on straightforward quotes like Egypt's president saying 'Vi er veldig glade for å være med.'
Manufactured Outrage 1/5
No outrage expressed or manufactured; reports skepticism factually, e.g., Norway's 'kan ikke være med i et råd med en struktur som utfordrer FNs rolle,' without amplifying anger.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
No demands for immediate action from readers; it simply reports the signing ceremony at 'Klokken 10.30 torsdag' and leaders' responses without pressuring involvement.
Emotional Triggers 2/5
The content uses neutral reporting without fear, outrage, or guilt language, such as factual lists of countries joining like 'Saudi-Arabia, Tyrkia, Egypt' or declining like 'Norge, Sverige og Frankrike.' No emotional triggers evident.

Identified Techniques

Name Calling, Labeling Loaded Language Doubt Repetition Whataboutism, Straw Men, Red Herring
Was this analysis helpful?
Share this analysis
Share on X Facebook LinkedIn
Analyze Something Else