Publication summary
3% 47 analyzed articles/videos 29,642 analyzed words
BS Summary: These @politifact results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Framing Effect , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 5.1% saturation with 9,216 hits . Analysis detected 90,004 faulty-reasoning hits from 179,020 analyzed words across 47 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.9% and a BS Rank of 1% (376 of 379 publications). This @politifact is better (less manipulative) than 99.20% of the peer group. @politifact
Publication details
Total words: 179,020
Article count: 47
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
1% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.8% percentile 0.9% BS Score47 analyzed articles179K 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 3.6% 3.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 5.2% 5.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 2.5% 2.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 2.6% 2.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 4.6% 4.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 0.6% 0.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 0.8% 0.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 2.0% 2.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Publication 0.8% 0.8% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 3.0% 3.0% 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 3.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 5.2%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 4.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.7%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Publication 2.1%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst