For builders: Understand that you either learn to play the influence game or find allies willing to help.

Author: rosie, Crypto KOL

Compiled by: Felix, PANews

The cryptocurrency Twitter community (CT) claims to be the most decentralized information network in finance. They call it "permissionless discussion." Anyone can share alpha, anyone can build their own audience, and anyone can influence the conversation.

But the reality is that about 100 accounts control the views of millions on cryptocurrency, which projects get attention, and where the funds flow. This is the most centralized influence economy, disguised as grassroots community building.

This complex influence mechanism even makes traditional media executives envious.

The Core Circle of Market Manipulation

CT is not a large dialogue platform but a series of concentric circles, with influence radiating disproportionately from the center outward.

First layer: Kingmakers (5 - 10 accounts). These accounts not only have followers but also possess network effects. When they tweet, hundreds of other accounts retweet within minutes. Their casual mentions can drive up token prices, their criticisms can destroy projects, and their endorsements can instantly legitimize projects.

When tweets from this level mention a project, it not only generates interaction but also attracts institutional attention, venture capital interest, and retail FOMO.

Second layer: Amplifiers (20-30 accounts). These accounts turn first-layer tweets into trending topics. They quote retweet, add commentary, and ensure the information reaches their specific communities, such as venture capital partners, well-known builders, and ecosystem leaders.

Third layer: Echo chambers (70 - 75 accounts). Mid-tier influencers who repeat the views of the first and second layers to their audiences. They rarely present new ideas but are crucial in amplifying the narrative. Their job is to make the first layer's views appear as community consensus.

Everyone else: The audience. They digest and respond to the content deemed worthy of discussion by the top 100.

How Narratives Actually Spread

This process is not random—it is predictable:

Step 1: Seeding

First-layer accounts share opinions, insights, or discoveries. This could be genuine alpha or strategic promotion.

Step 2: Amplification

Second-layer accounts quote retweet within 1 - 3 hours, adding their interpretations. This creates an illusion of independent discovery.

Step 3: Validation

Third-layer accounts echo back, providing supporting evidence, creating social proof that "all smart people agree."

Step 4: Cascading Effect

Retail accounts share fragmented content of the narrative, often misunderstanding key details but spreading the core message.

Step 5: Institutionalization

Crypto media writes articles citing "crypto Twitter sentiment," and the narrative becomes accepted fact.

The entire cycle takes only 24 to 48 hours. By the time most people see a "hot" cryptocurrency topic, the influence economy has already determined its direction.

The Economics Behind Influence

The influence of CT is not just about prestige—it is a complex business model:

Direct monetization:

• Disguising paid promotions as accidental discoveries

• Securing "consultant" positions in projects mentioned in their tweets

• Earning speaking fees at conferences and events

• Sponsorships for newsletters and premium content

Indirect value capture:

• Gaining early access to project information and tokens

• Receiving favorable allocations in funding rounds

• Building networks with top-tier venture capitalists and founders

• Board positions and equity opportunities

Portfolio pull: Many top accounts are angel investors or advisors for crypto projects.

Gatekeeping Issues

The concentration of influence in CT creates systemic biases:

Geographic bias: Most top-tier accounts are based in the U.S., creating a U.S.-centric global tech narrative.

Network bias: Projects with existing connections to influential accounts receive disproportionate attention, regardless of their technical value.

Wealth bias: Accounts with existing crypto wealth can participate in exclusive deals, creating a compounding advantage.

Language bias: Non-English projects and communities are systematically undervalued.

Professional bias: Financial engineering receives more attention than technological innovation, as finance professionals are better at self-promotion.

What Gets Promoted and What Gets Ignored

Analyzing CT trends reveals clear patterns in content promotion:

Heavily promoted content:

• New L1 blockchains (especially EVM-compatible ones)

• DeFi protocols with novel token mechanisms

• Any content labeled "infrastructure" or "scaling"

• Projects built for developers

Systematically ignored content:

• Projects without tokens or venture capital support

• Technological innovations lacking financial speculation

• Developers focused on delivery rather than marketing

• International projects without U.S. backgrounds

The result is a feedback loop where the development of cryptocurrency focuses on how to attract CT users' attention rather than genuinely advancing technological progress.

The Illusion of Decentralized Discourse

CT positions itself as fundamentally different from traditional media, yet its power dynamics are strikingly similar:

Traditional media: A few editors decide which content is worth reporting, journalists amplify these decisions, and the audience digests filtered information.

Crypto Twitter: A few top-tier accounts decide which projects are worth attention, second/third-tier accounts amplify these decisions, and the audience digests filtered information.

The main difference is that the influence economy of CT is less transparent in terms of power structure and financial incentives.

Downstream Effects

The tangible consequences of concentrated influence in CT:

Capital allocation: Venture capital firms pay attention to CT sentiment when making investment decisions. Hot projects get meeting opportunities, while obscure projects are ignored.

Developer focus: Builders' choices on which projects to pursue are partly influenced by what they see being praised in social dynamics.

Retail behavior: Millions make financial decisions based on narratives from 100 accounts with undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Media coverage: Crypto journalists use Twitter sentiment as a measure of importance, amplifying the selective nature of the influence economy.

Breaking the Cycle

Here are some observations to address this reality:

For builders: Understand that technical excellence without narrative means obscurity. Either learn to play the influence game or find allies willing to help.

For investors: The opinions on CT are a lagging indicator of top-tier accounts' views, not true market sentiment. By the time something is "hot," you are already late.

For users: Follow accounts that consistently share diverse viewpoints and in-depth technical analysis, rather than those that merely echo mainstream views and engage in paid promotions.

For the entire ecosystem: Recognize that the concentration of influence on CT undermines efforts that should be aimed at decentralization.

Conclusion

CT is not broken—it is functioning exactly as designed.

The issue is not the existence of influence networks (they will always exist)—but rather that people pretend CT represents organic, decentralized discussion, when in fact it is a complex influence economy with concentrated power and undisclosed economic incentives.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。