Stratalens · Methodology

Every score on this site is built one way. Here it is.

This page is the standing disclosure behind PRISM and every Coverage Audit: the full 15-technique taxonomy, the fixed 0–10 Manipulation Index bands, the quote-verification protocol that separates a finding from a guess, and the exact models doing the work. When any of it changes, the changelog at the bottom says so.

The taxonomy

15 techniques, 4 families

Every analysis draws from the same fixed library — the same names, the same definitions, whether the source leans left or right. The framework flags the persuasion mechanism, never the party. If a technique isn't on this list, we don't invent one.

Emotionalpressure through feeling
Appeal to Fear
A threat framed as certain or imminent to push a conclusion the evidence alone doesn't earn.
Scapegoating
A complex problem pinned on one person or group as its single cause.
Bandwagon
"Everyone already agrees" offered in place of a reason to agree.
Plain Folks
Borrowed "ordinary people" credentials standing in for evidence.
Framingpressure through wording
Loaded Language
Emotionally charged word choice that delivers a verdict before the facts do.
False Dichotomy
Many possible positions collapsed into exactly two, one of them unacceptable.
Strawman
A weaker version of the opposing argument, rebutted in place of the real one.
Transfer
Prestige or stigma moved from one thing onto another without a logical link between them.
Dog Whistle
Phrasing that reads neutral to most audiences while signaling something sharper to one.
Glittering Generality
A virtue word broad enough to be unfalsifiable, doing the work of an argument.
Euphemism
Softened wording that shrinks the substance of what actually happened.
Logicalpressure through structure
Whataboutism
A criticism answered with a counter-accusation instead of an answer.
Card Stacking
Only the evidence for one side makes it onto the page.
False Urgency
A manufactured deadline that pushes the decision ahead of the thinking.
Credibilitypressure through borrowed trust
Appeal to Authority
A name or title standing in for evidence — or an expert cited outside their expertise.
The scale

The Manipulation Index, 0–10

One number per article: how much persuasive pressure the text applies, on a fixed scale with fixed band cut-points. The index measures pressure, not truth — a factually accurate piece can still score high, and a wrong one can score low. The verdict on the facts stays yours.

Low
0.0 – 3.9
Conventional reporting register. Techniques, where present, are incidental — they are not carrying the argument.
Elevated
4.0 – 6.4
Persuasion techniques carry part of the argument. The framing is doing work the evidence should be doing.
High
6.5 – 7.9
Techniques are load-bearing. Remove them and the piece's conclusion no longer follows from what remains.
Severe
8.0 – 10
The piece is built on the techniques. Pressure is the point; the information is the vehicle.

The cut-points are identical on every StrataLens surface — the free PRISM tool, Coverage Audits, and standing monitors — so a 6.8 means the same thing everywhere, and two reports are directly comparable.

The floor under every claim

Verbatim quotes, machine-verified

The step that separates a StrataLens finding from a chatbot guess: every finding must rest on a quote from the source, and every quote is checked by code before it ships. A quote that cannot be verified is flagged — it is never asserted.

01

Sources are fetched and read as text

The analysis sees the article's actual words on the page — not a model's memory of what an outlet "usually" says.

02

Every finding must anchor to a quoted span

The model is required to mark each quoted span explicitly as it writes. Unquoted assertions about the text don't qualify as findings.

03

Code checks each span against the source

Deterministic code — not a model — verifies every marked span, character-for-character after typographic normalization (curly vs. straight quotes, letter case, punctuation spacing), so formatting can never fake a match or fake a failure. The quote's full word sequence must appear in the source text. Spans shorter than 12 normalized characters are too ambiguous to verify and never count as verified.

04

Unverifiable means flagged, never asserted

Anything that fails the check is flagged as unverified or removed. It is never smoothed over into a finding, and the counts — quotes checked, quotes verified — are reported, not hidden.

05

The ledger ships with the report

Every Coverage Audit includes quotes.json — a machine-readable ledger listing, for every analysis layer of every article, how many quotes were checked and how many verified against the source — plus the exact text of any quote that failed verification, tied to its article URL. Failures are printed, never smoothed over; they're what the guarantee pays on. See a sample ledger → · the published schema →

Check a ledger yourself — right here, in your browser.
Validates structure against the schema and re-runs the arithmetic (checked − verified must equal the printed failures, on every row). Nothing uploads — the file never leaves your machine.
Drop a quotes.json here, , or try the sample ledger
This protocol is what the Checkable-Claim Guarantee stands on: if any finding in a delivered Coverage Audit rests on a quote that fails verification against its source, that audit is free. Scope and terms on the Coverage Audit page →
The machinery

Model disclosure

Which model runs which stage, by exact ID. A model never grades its own citations — verification is deterministic code.

Deep analysis pass
claude-sonnet-5
Runs the technique mapping and Manipulation Index scoring for PRISM analyses and Coverage Audit reports, against the fetched source text.
Quote verification
no model — deterministic code
The verification step described above is plain string matching in code. No model is asked whether its own quotes are real.

When a model ID changes, the change is recorded in the changelog below, and reports produced after the change cite the new ID.

Reference corpus

Percentile baselines — disclosed, and now live

A score means more with a baseline behind it. A fixed public reference corpus of scored articles lets any article's Manipulation Index also be read as a percentile against the wider press.

Status · v0 corpus · n = 121 · built July 2026

The v0 baseline is published: 121 articles from 11 mainstream US outlets across the political spectrum (left/center/right), each scored on the same 0–10 Manipulation Index, median 3.5. Full distribution, per-lean medians, and composition are on the State of the Baseline page.

Every Coverage Audit now reads its average score as a percentile against this corpus (and a "manipulation debt" vs the reference average). A percentile only appears once the corpus has at least 30 scored articles; below that the report shows absolute 0–10 scores only, never a fabricated percentile.

Even-handedness

We run it on ourselves

A methodology that maps persuasion techniques should survive contact with its own sales copy. So the same PRISM read that scores news coverage runs against StrataLens's own Coverage Audit page — and the result publishes here unedited: score, band, and every technique it catches us using.

Manipulation Index
4.8/10 Elevated

Run against stratalens.co/audit.html on 2026-07-04, claude-sonnet-5. 12/14 candidate quotes verified.

  • False Dichotomy
  • Strawman
  • Glittering Generality
  • Card Stacking
  • Appeal to Authority

2 candidate quote(s) did not verify and are excluded above, per the same protocol every audit uses.

Versioned

Methodology changelog

Every substantive change to the taxonomy, the bands, the verification protocol, or the models lands here, dated. Corrections included — especially corrections.

2026-07-02
v1.0
First public release of this methodology page: the 15-technique taxonomy, the fixed Manipulation Index bands, the quote-verification protocol, model disclosure, the reference-corpus stub, and the standing self-audit commitment.
2026-07-01
Correction, pre-publication: customer-facing copy said Coverage Audits span "roughly ten articles" while the engine analyzes up to 15. All copy corrected to "up to 15 articles."

Entries are append-only. If a change would make older reports non-comparable with newer ones, the entry says so explicitly.

Now that you've seen the method — run it.

Try a single headline in PRISM free, or put the full protocol to work across your beat with a Coverage Audit.

Order a Coverage Audit → Try PRISM free