Thread by @DataRepublican

🧵 THREAD: NCRI's Analysis: How Abuse of 𝕏's Platform boosted Nick Fuentes

A few days ago, @elonmusk got "ratioed" by Nick Fuentes.

The air quotes are intentional. There was nothing organic about the ratio.

This morning, Network Contagion Research Institute (@ncri_io) released a forensic breakdown of how Nick Fuentes' sudden rise over the past year was driven by synthetic amplification, foreign engagement clusters, and coordinated raid behavior.

I read the full report and asked NCRI some clarifying questions about their methodology. The findings are staggering.

As always, patience as I pull this thread together. 👇

@elonmusk @ncri_io You can download the breaking report here: networkcontagion.us/reports/americ…

@elonmusk @ncri_io The topline claim: Fuentes’s "influence" did not emerge entirely organically. Instead, it was manufactured by unusually fast, unusually concentrated, and unusually foreign engagement patterns, the kind normally associated with coordinated manipulation networks.

@elonmusk @ncri_io The data show Fuentes receiving more early retweets than Elon Musk, despite Musk having literally 100× the audience. In the first 30 minutes, Fuentes dominates velocity charts, an anomaly no legitimate account in U.S. politics resembles.

@elonmusk @ncri_io The contrast gets even more stark when normalizing for number of followers.

@elonmusk @ncri_io NCRI then drilled down: 61% of all Fuentes retweets in the first 30 minutes came from accounts that did this repeatedly across multiple posts.

@elonmusk @ncri_io Who are these early retweeters?
According to the report: 92% are fully anonymous: no name, no photo, no location, no contact info. And most are “single-purpose” Groyper accounts with bios, banners, or posting histories dedicated to boosting Fuentes.

And it gets stranger: Fuentes’s most viral posts are heavily retweeted by foreign accounts, including India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Malaysia, and Indonesia. These countries have zero organic link to Fuentes’s U.S.-centric identity politics. They do match regions widely used for low-cost engagement farms.

@elonmusk @ncri_io IBulk retweets, coordinated boost networks, inauthentic accounts, and synchronized amplification windows all violate X’s “Platform Manipulation and Spam” rules. NCRI explicitly notes that Fuentes’s network fits every forbidden category.

@elonmusk @ncri_io Crucially: Fuentes isn’t a passive beneficiary. He actively coordinates these raids. NCRI compiled hundreds of instances where Fuentes gives real-time commands like “retweet this,” “everybody retweet,” “retweet her,” immediately after dropping the link in chat.

@elonmusk @ncri_io The report also highlights former insiders alleging that Fuentes inflated viewer metrics on his streaming infrastructure using multipliers, and that he previously directed loyalists to perform coordinated online actions in private chats.

While the synthetic engagement engine was accelerating, mainstream media began responding to the manipulated visibility, trying to paint him as the new "Charlie Kirk".

Mainstream press mentions of Fuentes tripled after September 2025, and “high-status” framing of him in articles rose by 59.6%.

Despite branding himself “America First,” Fuentes repeatedly sided with foreign adversaries on state media even during crises involving U.S. forces. He positioned himself as a defender of Iran, Russia, and even China over his own country.

This is who was algorithmically elevated.

@elonmusk @ncri_io I would like to acknowledge that Nick Fuentes does tap into a real frustration. As @honestpollster said, the videos do not entirely watch themselves.

But make no mistake: the rise is not organic, and the agenda is not America First.

Thread End (for now).

Talked with someone who has been infiltrating groypers - which is actually insightful, this is what he had to say. Also important to note that presence of foreign amplification doesn't mean he doesn't have a big genuine fanbase:

Short form explanation:

First, he is one of the most misquoted, taken out of context people I have ever seen in any media.

He is the polar extreme in the opposite direction from cancel culture, and he’s also an actual product of the censorship machine.

Without the censorship and deplatforming of him from literally everywhere, he may not have ended up so extreme.

He’s essentially been entirely alone building an audience on Rumble for years. Even before Rumble existed he was thrown off everything and still kept going. The result is some of the most polarized and siloed people on the internet.

Their ideas were never properly challenged, never given true pushback, because no one saw them or even acknowledged his existence.

Now, that he has turned into the mainstream he’s spent the past 10 years honing this message into something that is translatable to a mass media audience.

And I’ll tell you the problem, he’s extremely good. His points are actually true, the problem is his he arrives at them are rooted in the wrong direction. That is where you actually see the antisemitism.

Instead of saying: The USA after the Cold War needed to control the Middle East, and we figured out how to do that by working with certain countries and destroying others. Whether or not that was a good decision or not, that was still the decision of the American government and ultimately American citizens as it is our country, and we are responsible for our own government.

Nick’s read is: “The Israeli’s and Jews of the world have conspired to control the American government so that they can dominate the Middle East.” (Basically his ‘JQ’ question summed up.)

Now the deal is I refuse to believe after watching him do that for sometime that he is stupid enough to think that’s true.

He doesn’t care which side wins, so long as it leads to the ultimate goal, which is a rise of a Caesar type figure.