Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

30
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
76% confidence
Moderate manipulation indicators. Some persuasion patterns present.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
X (Twitter)

OskarK on X

Detta har ju varit klart och öppet diskuterats längre. Bara radioskuggan i SR och SVT MSM som väljer att prata om annat.

Posted by OskarK
View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 1/5
No presentation of only two extreme options; just observes media choice.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 2/5
Mild us-vs-them: open discussers vs. 'SR och SVT MSM' as silent elite.
Simplistic Narratives 3/5
Frames as clear truth ('klart') ignored by scheming media choosing 'annat,' reducing to good awareness vs. evil blackout.
Timing Coincidence 2/5
Recent timing coincides with X cluster on SVT/SR allegedly underreporting Iran protests (Jan 8-11 posts, 'Iran' trending), minor correlation to ongoing discourse rather than distracting from Swedish events like weather or distant election.
Historical Parallels 2/5
Resembles populist 'media blackout' tropes akin to global fake news narratives; Swedish disinfo histories involve foreign ops, but no strong match to state campaigns.
Financial/Political Gain 3/5
Benefits anti-public media sentiments popular among right-wing groups like Sweden Democrats critiquing state-funded SR/SVT bias; no direct financial or paid elements identified.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No claims that 'everyone' agrees; vaguely notes 'öppet diskuterats' without broad consensus pressure.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 2/5
'Iran' trending prompts similar anti-MSM posts urging X use; mild pressure to distrust SVT/SR, but no astroturfing or rapid conversion push evident.
Phrase Repetition 3/5
Shares framing with recent X posts accusing SVT/SR of ignoring Iran regime protests (e.g., economic spin, 'blunda'); moderate alignment in timing around trends, lacking verbatim coordination.
Logical Fallacies 3/5
Assumes media silence confirms truth ('radioskuggan... väljer att prata om annat'); mild appeal to popularity in 'öppet diskuterats.'
Authority Overload 1/5
No citations of experts or authorities; relies on unnamed prior discussions.
Cherry-Picked Data 2/5
No data presented at all, so no selective use.
Framing Techniques 3/5
Derogatory 'MSM' and 'radioskuggan' bias public media as shadowy/conspiratorial, contrasting with 'öppet diskuterats.'
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
No negative labeling of critics; accuses media of silence, not dissent suppression.
Context Omission 4/5
Omits what 'Detta' specifically is, despite claiming it's 'klart och öppet diskuterats,' leaving crucial context assumed.
Novelty Overuse 1/5
No unprecedented or shocking claims; explicitly states issue 'har ju varit klart och öppet diskuterats längre,' indicating familiarity.
Emotional Repetition 1/5
Single instance of mild irritation at media; no repeated emotional words or phrases.
Manufactured Outrage 2/5
Implies outrage at unstated 'detta' ignored by media, somewhat disconnected without specifics, but not highly fabricated.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
No calls for immediate action or response; content only observes media silence without demanding change.
Emotional Triggers 3/5
Mild frustration evoked by implying deliberate media cover-up in 'Bara radioskuggan i SR och SVT MSM som väljer att prata om annat,' but lacks intense fear, outrage, or guilt triggers.

Identified Techniques

Loaded Language Name Calling, Labeling Appeal to fear-prejudice Doubt Reductio ad hitlerum

What to Watch For

Consider why this is being shared now. What events might it be trying to influence?
This messaging appears coordinated. Look for independent sources with different framing.
Key context may be missing. What questions does this content NOT answer?

This content shows some manipulation indicators. Consider the source and verify key claims.

Was this analysis helpful?
Share this analysis
Share on X Facebook LinkedIn
Analyze Something Else