Author summary
0% 4 analyzed articles/videos 3,080 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Washington Examiner results contain 49 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect , Negativity Bias , and Politically Right Leaning Bias , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 20.6% saturation with 2,957 hits . Analysis detected 21,078 faulty-reasoning hits from 14,327 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 3% and a BS Rank of 60% (2,495 of 6,170 authors). This Washington Examiner is worse (more manipulative) than 59.60% of the peer group. Washington Examiner
Author details
Total words: 14,327
Article count: 4
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
60% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 59.6% percentile 3.0% BS Score4 analyzed articles14.3K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 6.0% 6.0% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 20.6% 20.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 5.2% 5.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 9.8% 9.8% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 9.0% 9.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.4% 2.4% Politically Right Leaning… Sitewide 1.4% Author 9.7% 9.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 2.0% 2.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.5% 1.5% 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% Framing Effect: Author 6.0%, sitewide 26.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 20.6%, sitewide 5.3% Negativity Bias: Author 9.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.4%, sitewide 11.1% Halo Effect: Author 10.9%, sitewide 6.7% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 9.7%, sitewide 1.4% Hasty Generalization: Author 9.3%, sitewide 8.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.2%, sitewide 9.1% Indoctrination: Author 9.0%, sitewide 0.0% Confirmation Bias: Author 6.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 6.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.4%, sitewide 3.3% Anecdotal: Author 2.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 4.6% Unattributed Quote: Author 4.4%, sitewide 1.1% Ad Hominem: Author 4.1%, sitewide 2.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 3.1% False Dilemma: Author 3.0%, sitewide 1.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.0%, sitewide 0.8% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.9%, sitewide 2.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst