Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

11
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
65% confidence
Low manipulation indicators. Content appears relatively balanced.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
Jørn Eggum: – Stein er ikke et dårlig menneske
e24.no

Jørn Eggum: – Stein er ikke et dårlig menneske

Som to av Norges mektigste menn utformet de politikk på servietter på Oslos mest tradisjonsrike brune pub, ifølge Jørn Eggum. I mars møter han Stein Lier-Hansen i retten.

View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 1/5
No presentation of only two extreme options; discusses bills as mix of real and fabricated without false choices.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 1/5
No us-vs-them framing; portrays Eggum and Lier-Hansen as long-time negotiation partners.
Simplistic Narratives 2/5
Hints at nuance with 'Stein er ikke et dårlig menneske, men han har gjort veldig mye feil'; avoids stark good-evil binary.
Timing Coincidence 1/5
Publication aligns organically with upcoming Jan 21 trial, as seen in prior coverage since Nov 2025; searches show no distraction from major Jan 15-18 events or strategic priming patterns.
Historical Parallels 1/5
Standard journalism on verified court case, unlike propaganda playbooks; no parallels to state ops or astroturfing in searches across outlets.
Financial/Political Gain 1/5
No clear beneficiaries; neutral reporting on industry leaders' trial with no promotion of orgs like Norsk Industri; E24's business focus shows no funding or political ties per searches.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No suggestions that 'everyone agrees' or widespread consensus; focuses on Eggum's personal account.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 1/5
No urgency or pressure to shift views; low-key X mentions with no manufactured momentum or trends since Jan 15.
Phrase Repetition 2/5
Unique Eggum interview but overlaps with witness stories elsewhere; no verbatim coordination, just normal shared trial beats.
Logical Fallacies 2/5
Minor appeal to relationship ('pleie et godt forhold') justifies expenses without deeper scrutiny.
Authority Overload 1/5
No citations of experts or authorities; solely Eggum's statements and court facts.
Cherry-Picked Data 2/5
Eggum's view dominates ('de fleste regningene er oppdiktet'); some real meetings acknowledged but minimized as 'en brøkdel'.
Framing Techniques 3/5
Phrases like 'to av Norges mektigste menn' and 'politikk på servietter' add dramatic flair; 'litt mormonere' humorizes unions.
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
No labeling of critics; notes organizations decline comment pre-trial neutrally.
Context Omission 3/5
Omits full trial details or other witnesses' accounts beyond mentions; relies heavily on Eggum's perspective without broader context.
Novelty Overuse 1/5
No claims of 'unprecedented,' 'shocking,' or 'never before seen'; routine details of bar bills and negotiations presented plainly.
Emotional Repetition 1/5
Emotional words like 'sjokk' or 'skuffet' used sparingly without repetition for emphasis.
Manufactured Outrage 1/5
No outrage amplification or fact-disconnected anger; Eggum defends Lier-Hansen mildly as 'ikke et dårlig menneske' amid factual dispute.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
No demands for immediate action, shares, or responses; content is factual pre-trial reporting.
Emotional Triggers 2/5
Mild expressions like 'Jeg fikk jo sjokk' and 'Selvfølgelig er jeg skuffet' appear once each without heavy fear, outrage, or guilt induction; no pervasive emotional language found.

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