Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

11
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
73% confidence
Low manipulation indicators. Content appears relatively balanced.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
X (Twitter)

Eweezy on X

You got tricked.

Posted by Eweezy
View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 1/5
No presentation of only two extreme options; vague statement omits choices entirely.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 2/5
'You got tricked.' pits reader against implied savvy speaker, creating mild us-vs-them but without deeper dynamics.
Simplistic Narratives 2/5
Binary implication of tricked vs. aware in 'You got tricked.' oversimplifies without nuance or evidence.
Timing Coincidence 1/5
Timing appears organic with no suspicious links to recent events like US strikes or ICE incidents; searches confirm sporadic, unrelated uses on X.
Historical Parallels 1/5
No parallels to propaganda playbooks; searches found no matches in state-sponsored or corporate campaigns, just generic trickery anecdotes.
Financial/Political Gain 1/5
No evident beneficiaries among politicians, companies, or groups; X posts show personal jabs without aligned interests or funding ties.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No suggestions that 'everyone agrees' or widespread belief; isolated accusation lacks social proof.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 1/5
No pressure for quick opinion change or manufactured momentum; searches show no trends, bots, or urgency around the phrase.
Phrase Repetition 1/5
No coordination; phrase scatters across diverse X contexts like AI videos or politics with unique framings and low engagement.
Logical Fallacies 2/5
Accusatory 'You got tricked.' employs ad hominem by impugning reader's judgment without proof.
Authority Overload 1/5
No experts or authorities cited; standalone claim without backing.
Cherry-Picked Data 1/5
No data presented at all, selective or otherwise.
Framing Techniques 3/5
Direct second-person 'You got tricked.' frames reader as gullible victim, biasing toward defensiveness via accusatory language.
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
No labeling of critics; does not address or dismiss opposition.
Context Omission 4/5
Crucial context omitted—what trick, by whom, evidence?—leaving 'You got tricked.' baseless and incomplete.
Novelty Overuse 1/5
No claims of unprecedented or shocking events; 'You got tricked.' is a commonplace accusation without novelty hype.
Emotional Repetition 1/5
Single short phrase with no repeated emotional triggers; lacks any buildup or reiteration.
Manufactured Outrage 2/5
Mild accusation in 'You got tricked.' but no outrage amplified beyond facts, as no supporting details are provided.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
No demands for immediate action or response; the content simply states 'You got tricked.' without pressing for any behavior.
Emotional Triggers 2/5
The phrase 'You got tricked.' mildly provokes defensiveness but lacks strong fear, outrage, or guilt language typically used for emotional manipulation.

Identified Techniques

Loaded Language Name Calling, Labeling Appeal to Authority Exaggeration, Minimisation Thought-terminating Cliches
Was this analysis helpful?
Share this analysis
Share on X Facebook LinkedIn
Analyze Something Else