Recently we have been told by the liberal press that some guy named Nick Fuentes, whom nobody had heard of and who has accomplished more or less nothing in life, is now the Pied Piper of American youth. Millions of young men, in particular, supposedly are avid followers of Fuentes’ bizarre political pronouncements.
I never believed it. First, I don’t believe that millions of young American men think Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler were admirable figures. Second, Fuentes exists only online. Does he ever appear anywhere? Does he draw a crowd? There are influencers who have large numbers of online followers that are actually legitimate. Riley Gaines, to cite one example out of many, has a huge online following, but she also draws big crowds wherever she goes. Real people follow her, and real people want to hear her speak. And I hear people talking about Riley and her views, whereas I have never heard anyone mention Nick Fuentes, outside the context of his supposedly having a big following.
But that supposed following may be almost entirely fraudulent. This is a long post, with multiple charts. Full text below, see tweet for the charts:
🚨BREAKING: A new report from @ncri_io shows that Nick Fuentes’s sudden mainstream visibility reflects a coordinated illusion instead of a grassroots surge.
According to NCRI, Fuentes’s rise was driven by synchronized amplification networks, anonymous booster accounts, foreign… pic.twitter.com/eLCff8y1hG
— Colin Wright (@SwipeWright) December 8, 2025
🚨BREAKING: A new report from @ncri_io shows that Nick Fuentes’s sudden mainstream visibility reflects a coordinated illusion instead of a grassroots surge.
According to NCRI, Fuentes’s rise was driven by synchronized amplification networks, anonymous booster accounts, foreign engagement farms, and a media ecosystem that mistook manufactured noise for genuine political momentum.
The new report reveals
– Manipulation of X’s algorithms: NCRI compared early engagement on @NickJFuentes’s posts with those of major influencers like @elonmusk, @hasanthehun, @IanCarrollShow and @TheOmniLiberal
. Somehow, Fuentes massively outperformed all of them in the first 30 minutes.Image
Image
– A coordinated booster network: 61% of early retweets come from accounts that repeatedly amplify multiple Fuentes posts within the same 30-minute window. 92% are anonymous; many openly identify as Groypers or “signal boosters.” Their feeds exist almost solely to promote him.Image
– Foreign engagement at massive scale: Nearly half of the retweets on his most viral posts came from accounts clustered in places like India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Malaysia, and Indonesia, all of which are hubs for low-cost engagement farming.
Image
– Fuentes actively directs the manipulation: NCRI documents him instructing viewers during livestreams to retweet his posts seconds after they drop, triggering algorithmic boosts. This behavior may violate X’s coordinated inauthentic activity policies.
– The media fell for it: Between June and November 2025, 15 major outlets published 149 stories mentioning Fuentes. After Charlie Kirk’s assassination, NCRI found a 60% spike in “high-status” framing, i.e., reporters suddenly describing him as more influential and politically relevant.
Mainstream media thought they were tracking organic sentiment on the right. In reality, it was reacting to manufactured noise.
Fuentes is an extremist entertainer with a niche following. But coordinated amplification networks have artificially pushed him into the center of national discourse.
According to the NCRI, the real issue isn’t Fuentes: it’s the fact that our media and tech ecosystem can no longer reliably distinguish organic influence from manufactured momentum. And if one fringe figure can break through this easily, others will follow.
Read my full analysis of the report here ⬇️
🔗https://realityslaststand.com/p/the-manufactured-rise-of-nick-fuentes
