Publication summary
99% 1 analyzed article/video 584 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Beijing Bulletin results contain 30 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote , Biased Writer Voice , and Post Hoc (False Cause) , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 33.2% saturation with 581 hits . Analysis detected 3,030 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,752 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.8% and a BS Rank of 96% (19 of 410 publications). This Beijing Bulletin is worse (more manipulative) than 95.60% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 1,752
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
96% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 95.6% percentile 5.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.8K 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% Unattributed Quote Sitewide 1.1% Publication 14.0% 14.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 8.8% 8.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 2.7% 2.7% Begging the Question Sitewide 1.7% Publication 8.6% 8.6% Politically Right Leaning… Sitewide 1.4% Publication 7.8% 7.8% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Publication 9.6% 9.6% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Publication 33.2% 33.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 10.1% 10.1% Quote-first Misdirection Sitewide 0.0% Publication 4.5% 4.5% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Publication 1.7% 1.7% 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: Publication 33.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 8.8%, sitewide 19.2% Unattributed Quote: Publication 14.0%, sitewide 1.1% Appeal to Authority: Publication 2.7%, sitewide 11.1% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 10.1%, sitewide 5.3% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 9.6%, sitewide 3.3% Availability Heuristic: Publication 6.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 8.7%, sitewide 8.1% Begging the Question: Publication 8.6%, sitewide 1.7% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Publication 7.8%, sitewide 1.4% Confirmation Bias: Publication 5.6%, sitewide 7.5% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 7.3%, sitewide 3.7% In-Group Bias: Publication 4.0%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Publication 3.6%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 5.2% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 5.1%, sitewide 2.7% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 4.2%, sitewide 4.6% Quote-first Misdirection: Publication 4.5%, sitewide 0.0% Recency Bias: Publication 4.3%, sitewide 2.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Publication 4.2%, sitewide 0.8% Anchoring Bias: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 4.0% False Dilemma: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 1.5% Circular Reasoning: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 0.1% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 3.1% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst