Speaker summary
⁠68%5 analyzed articles/videos176.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Kyle Diamantas results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Recency Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Ad Hominem, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 26.2% saturation with 66 hits. Analysis detected 267.362 faulty-reasoning hits from 176.5 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 13.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠19% (23,039 of 28,364 speakers). This Kyle Diamantas is better (less manipulative) than 81.20% of the peer group.
Kyle Diamantas

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

19% percentile
025507510018.8% percentile
13.4% BS Score5 analyzed videos176.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 27.0%27.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 26.2%26.2%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 13.1%13.1%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 9.5%9.5%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 7.1%7.1%Special PleadingSitewide 0.3%Speaker 7.1%7.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 21.4%21.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 7.1%7.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 2.0%2.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Recency Bias: Speaker 27.0%, sitewide 2.7%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 26.2%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 21.4%, sitewide 15.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 13.1%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 9.5%, sitewide 1.9%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 7.1%, sitewide 5.3%Indoctrination: Speaker 7.1%, sitewide 0.0%Special Pleading: Speaker 7.1%, sitewide 0.3%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Recency BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos