Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video50.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Melanie Folwell results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias, Ad Hominem, and Appeal to Emotion, with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 55.1% saturation with 54 hits. Analysis detected 203.875 faulty-reasoning hits from 50.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 51.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠72% (7,749 of 26,772 speakers). This Melanie Folwell is worse (more manipulative) than 71.10% of the peer group.
Melanie Folwell
Speaker details
Total words: 50.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

71% percentile
025507510071.1% percentile
51.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos50.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 75.0%75.0%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 55.1%55.1%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 27.6%27.6%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 22.4%22.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 27.6%27.6%

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%Ad Hominem: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 2.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 6.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 55.1%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 27.6%, sitewide 15.9%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 27.6%, sitewide 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 22.4%, sitewide 2.7%Ad HominemSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos