Publication summary
30% 71 analyzed articles/videos 36,422 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chicago Sun-Times results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7.9% saturation with 12,458 hits . Analysis detected 118,525 faulty-reasoning hits from 157,859 analyzed words across 71 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of 27% (300 of 410 publications). This Chicago Sun-Times is better (less manipulative) than 73.10% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 157,859
Article count: 71
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
27% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 26.9% percentile 1.4% BS Score71 analyzed articles157.9K 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% Publication 5.3% 5.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 7.9% 7.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 5.5% 5.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 2.8% 2.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 2.9% 2.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.7% 1.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 3.0% 3.0% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 2.9% 2.9% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Publication 1.0% 1.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 4.6% 4.6% 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 5.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 7.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 5.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 2.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 4.6%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 2.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 2.6%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 4.3%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 3.1%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 2.5%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Indoctrination: Publication 2.2%, sitewide 0.0% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst