Skip to main content

Influence Tactics Analysis Results

50
Influence Tactics Score
out of 100
69% confidence
Moderate manipulation indicators. Some persuasion patterns present.
Optimized for English content.
Analyzed Content
X (Twitter)

EliteThink on X

More likely she’s just bitter about Elon not giving her the attention she wanted, and wants to sacrifice their son just to get back at him. She knows what would hurt him the most Women can be unimaginably cruel

Posted by EliteThink
View original →

Analysis Factors

Confidence
False Dilemmas 2/5
No binary extremes presented; speculates motive without forcing two options.
Us vs. Them Dynamic 3/5
Pits 'us' (Elon supporters) against 'her' (bitter ex-woman), generalizing 'Women can be unimaginably cruel' to fuel gender tribalism.
Simplistic Narratives 4/5
Reduces dispute to good (hurt Elon) vs. evil (cruel, sacrificial woman), ignoring custody complexities.
Timing Coincidence 4/5
Post emerges amid Jan 12 custody filing news where Musk seeks full control fearing transition, plus Grok scandal; amplifies pro-Musk narrative during his AI backlash.
Historical Parallels 2/5
Superficial resemblance to online smears in celebrity custody wars, but lacks ties to known propaganda like state ops; no specific historical matches found.
Financial/Political Gain 3/5
Portrays St. Clair negatively in custody fight, aiding Musk's PR; echoes his anti-trans stance, benefiting ideological allies in right-wing circles.
Bandwagon Effect 1/5
No claims that 'everyone agrees'; presents personal speculation without invoking majority support.
Rapid Behavior Shifts 4/5
Sudden X posts demand viewing St. Clair as extortionist 'trooning' kid; momentum from Walsh and custody news creates pressure to adopt anti-St. Clair stance.
Phrase Repetition 4/5
Echoes cluster of X posts verbatim accusing St. Clair of trans threat to spite Musk, timed to her statement and Walsh post, suggesting shared talking points.
Logical Fallacies 3/5
Assumes unproven intent ('wants to sacrifice... to get back at him') via mind-reading; ad hominem on gender.
Authority Overload 1/5
No experts or authorities cited; relies on anonymous speculation.
Cherry-Picked Data 2/5
Selects revenge motive without broader evidence from ongoing disputes.
Framing Techniques 4/5
Biased terms like 'bitter,' 'sacrifice their son,' 'unimaginably cruel' frame St. Clair as vengeful villain.
Suppression of Dissent 1/5
No labeling of critics; focuses on attacking one figure.
Context Omission 4/5
Omits St. Clair's full context, custody details, her past anti-trans book, and Grok image complaints fueling dispute.
Novelty Overuse 2/5
Claims of bitterness and cruelty are common tropes in celebrity breakups, with no 'unprecedented' or shocking new elements presented.
Emotional Repetition 2/5
Emotional triggers like bitterness and cruelty appear once without repetition or buildup.
Manufactured Outrage 4/5
Outrage over 'sacrifice their son' is hyperbolic and disconnected from verified facts, framing a custody shift as child endangerment purely for revenge.
Urgent Action Demands 1/5
No demands for immediate action or response; the post merely speculates on motives without urging readers to do anything.
Emotional Triggers 4/5
The post uses outrage-inducing language like 'Women can be unimaginably cruel' and accuses 'she' of wanting to 'sacrifice their son just to get back at him,' evoking fear and anger toward women in custody disputes.

Identified Techniques

Loaded Language Name Calling, Labeling Reductio ad hitlerum Whataboutism, Straw Men, Red Herring Doubt

What to Watch For

Notice the emotional language used - what concrete facts support these claims?
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.
This content frames an 'us vs. them' narrative. Consider perspectives from 'the other side'.
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