Author summary
⁠1%1 analyzed article/video712 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Dominic Fracassa results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Negativity Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 4.2% saturation with 119 hits. Analysis detected 235 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,848 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠19% (7,445 of 9,128 authors). This Dominic Fracassa is better (less manipulative) than 81.60% of the peer group.
Dominic Fracassa
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠19%Dominic Fracassa (selected)2%
⁠100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 2,848
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

18% percentile
025507510018.4% percentile
1.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.8K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 0.9%0.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 1.3%1.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 4.2%4.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 0.0%0.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 0.9%0.9%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Author 0.9%0.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%5%5%10%10%15%15%20%20%25%25%Negativity Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 4.2%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.0%, sitewide 5.3%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.1%Negativity BiasSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos