Speaker summary
⁠85%5 analyzed articles/videos141 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Truth Social results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Availability Heuristic, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 67.4% saturation with 95 hits. Analysis detected 446 faulty-reasoning hits from 141 analyzed words across 5 articles and videos, generating a BS Score of 35.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠54% (12,886 of 27,811 speakers). This Truth Social is worse (more manipulative) than 53.70% of the peer group.
Truth Social

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

54% percentile
025507510053.7% percentile
35.1% BS Score5 analyzed videos141 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 67.4%67.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 58.2%58.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 34.0%34.0%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 34.0%34.0%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Speaker 30.5%30.5%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Speaker 27.7%27.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 34.0%34.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 27.7%27.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 2.8%2.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Framing Effect: Speaker 67.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 58.2%, sitewide 19.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 34.0%, sitewide 0.8%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 34.0%, sitewide 9.1%Begging the Question: Speaker 34.0%, sitewide 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Speaker 30.5%, sitewide 0.5%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 27.7%, sitewide 7.5%Tu Quoque: Speaker 27.7%, sitewide 0.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 2.8%, sitewide 15.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos