Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

17
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
70% confidence
Low manipulation indicators. Content appears relatively balanced.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
X (Twitter)

LouiΞ | apefollowape.eth🍌 on X

This is terrible news.

Posted by LouiΞ | apefollowape.eth🍌
View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 1/5
No presentation of limited extreme options or forced choices.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 2/5
'Terrible news' lacks any 'us vs. them' framing or group divisions.
Simplistic Narratives 2/5
Reduces an unspecified event to a binary negative label without nuance or explanation.
Timing Coincidence 1/5
Timing appears organic; searches reveal no suspicious correlation with major recent events like political announcements or accidents, and the phrase appears in unrelated contexts without strategic patterns.
Historical Parallels 1/5
No resemblance to known propaganda; historical searches discuss general bad news tactics but nothing matching this isolated generic phrase.
Financial/Political Gain 1/5
No clear beneficiaries identified; searches show no links to specific actors, funding, or campaigns promoting this vague statement.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No suggestions that 'everyone agrees' or widespread consensus on the claim.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 1/5
No urgency or pressure for belief change; searches confirm no trends, astroturfing, or amplified shifts tied to this content.
Phrase Repetition 1/5
Unique and organic; no coordinated repetition across sources, with X and web showing diverse, non-clustered uses.
Logical Fallacies 2/5
Appeals to emotion via 'terrible' without logical argument or evidence, but no deeper fallacies evident.
Authority Overload 1/5
No experts, sources, or authorities cited to bolster the claim.
Cherry-Picked Data 1/5
No data, statistics, or evidence presented whatsoever.
Framing Techniques 3/5
Biased negative framing through loaded words like 'terrible,' predisposing readers to a dire interpretation without substantiation.
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
No mention or negative labeling of critics or opposing views.
Context Omission 4/5
Critically omits what the 'terrible news' actually is, providing no context or details for evaluation.
Novelty Overuse 2/5
No claims of the news being 'unprecedented,' 'shocking,' or uniquely novel; it uses a generic negative descriptor.
Emotional Repetition 1/5
Only a single emotional phrase is used, with no repetition of triggers like fear or outrage words.
Manufactured Outrage 2/5
While 'terrible news' suggests outrage, it is entirely disconnected from any facts or context, appearing superficial.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
The content contains no demands for immediate action, sharing, or response from the audience.
Emotional Triggers 4/5
The phrase 'This is terrible news' employs strong negative emotional language to evoke fear, dismay, or outrage without any supporting details.

Identified Techniques

Thought-terminating Cliches Name Calling, Labeling Bandwagon Slogans Exaggeration, Minimisation
Was this analysis helpful?
Share this analysis
Share on X Facebook LinkedIn
Analyze Something Else