Speaker summary
⁠66%4 analyzed articles/videos40.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Candace Owens results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Tu Quoque, Quote-first Misdirection, and Ad Hominem, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 24 hits. Analysis detected 89.931 faulty-reasoning hits from 40.333 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 60.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠76% (6,959 of 28,364 speakers). This Candace Owens is worse (more manipulative) than 75.50% of the peer group.
Candace Owens
Speaker details
Total words: 40.333
Article count: 4
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

76% percentile
025507510075.5% percentile
60.6% BS Score4 analyzed videos40.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Speaker 59.3%59.3%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 54.6%54.6%Genetic FallacySitewide 1.4%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 15.9%Tu Quoque: Speaker 59.3%, sitewide 0.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 54.6%, sitewide 0.0%Ad Hominem: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 2.2%Genetic Fallacy: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.4%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos