Are you being manipulated on social media? Learn to recognize the tactics

This article was published on Re:Baltica.

An attack on reputation with an intention to undermine a person’s credibility

• Name calling or labelling assigns derogatory terms to discredit individuals or groups.

Example: The regime will repress all people who make cash transactions starting from 750 euros.

• Guilt by association links someone to a negative figure or ideology.

• Casting doubt subtly undermines credibility without direct accusations.

• Appeal to hypocrisy deflects criticism by accusing the opponent of similar faults.

Example: You drive a combustion engine car and eat meat, so don’t tell me you care about climate change!

• Smears or poisoning the well preemptively discredit a source.

Example: So-called public media only interview those they like.

• Ad hominem attacks target the person rather than their argument.

Example: “Greta Thunberg is a teenager with developmental disorders – what does she understand about climate change?”

• Trolling, including gaslighting and tone policing, seeks to provoke or derail discussion.

• The Galileo gambit falsely equates being criticized with being correct.

Example: Doctor X had their medical license revoked, so they must have been right that vaccines are dangerous.

• Stereotyping reduces individuals to oversimplified and often harmful generalizations.

An attack on the argument to justify why something is good or bad

• Flag waving appeals to patriotism or loyalty to justify a stance.

• Appeal to authority uses expert opinion to support a claim, while irrelevant authority misuses expertise from unrelated fields.

Example: Regulating same-sex partnerships is unacceptable – Trump said family can only be between a man and a woman.

• Appeal to popularity (bandwagon) suggests something is true or good because many people believe it.

• Confirmation bias reinforces pre-existing beliefs by selectively presenting information.

• Proof by example uses isolated cases as evidence for broader claims.

• Cultural biases rely on stereotypes or assumptions rooted in cultural norms.

• Appeal to tradition argues something is right because it has always been done that way.

• Appeal to ignorance claims something is true because it hasn’t been proven false.

An attack on the argument to distract the attention from the topic

• Strawman fallacy, where an argument is distorted or exaggerated to make it easier to attack. Instead of addressing the original point, a weaker version is refuted.

Example: Wind turbines kill birds, but they’re telling us wind energy is green.

• Red herring introduces unrelated information to distract from the topic at hand, steering the conversation in a different direction.

Example: China produces a third of the world’s emissions – what are we going to save here in Latvia?

• Whataboutism shifts focus by pointing to another issue – often unrelated or worse – to deflect criticism or avoid accountability.

An attack on the argument to simplify the logic behind causes and consequences

• Causal oversimplification attributes an outcome to a single cause, ignoring other contributing factors.

• False dilemma (or black-and-white fallacy) presents only two extreme options, excluding nuanced alternatives.

Example: Those who voted against the law we proposed apparently think everything is fine in the country.

• Consequential oversimplification, such as the slippery slope, suggests that one action will inevitably lead to extreme consequences.

Example: If same-sex partnership regulation is established, we’re paving the way for legalizing gay marriage and child adoption.

• Relativization downplays the seriousness of an issue by comparing it to something else.

• Generalization makes broad claims based on limited evidence.

Example: A food aid pack was found in the trash. The different mentality of Ukrainian refugees is incomprehensible to Latvians.

• Cherry picking or selective omission highlights only favorable facts while ignoring contradictory ones.

• False cause assumes a causal link where none exists, and false attribution misrepresents the source of a claim.

Example: Children had to dance on poor-quality flooring at Daugava Stadium. The state doesn’t care about children.

• False attribution misrepresents the source of a claim

• The politician’s syllogism uses flawed logic to justify action: “Something must be done; this is something; therefore, it must be done.”

• Circular reasoning uses the conclusion as its own proof.

• Far-fetched hypotheses introduce implausible explanations to distract or mislead.

An attack on the argument to encourage thinking in a particular way

• Slogans are short, memorable phrases that simplify complex ideas into persuasive soundbites, often repeated to reinforce a message.

• Conversation killers, also known as thought-terminating clichés, are phrases used to shut down debate or critical thinking.

Example: It is what it is, that’s just how things are.

• Using emotionally charged or strategically vague language to influence perception and trigger emotional responses.

Example: Wind farm projects must be stopped – Latvia must not be sold or leased.

• Exaggeration or minimisation distorts the scale or importance of an issue, often to provoke or downplay concern.

Example: Immigrants have flooded England. Thousands arrive every day in boats.

• Repetition reinforces messages through constant exposure, making them more memorable and seemingly credible.

• Fearmongering uses alarming language to incite fear and urgency.

• Dog whistles are coded messages that appear neutral but carry specific meanings for targeted groups.