Publication summary
35% 60 analyzed articles/videos 30,000 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chicago Sun-Times results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.6% saturation with 11,638 hits . Analysis detected 105,263 faulty-reasoning hits from 134,611 analyzed words across 60 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 29% (270 of 379 publications). This Chicago Sun-Times is better (less manipulative) than 71.20% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 134,611
Article count: 60
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
29% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 28.8% percentile 1.5% BS Score60 analyzed articles134.6K 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 5.6% 5.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 5.2% 5.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 8.7% 8.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 3.0% 3.0% 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 3.1% 3.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 2.8% 2.8% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Publication 0.9% 0.9% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Publication 0.6% 0.6% 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 5.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 8.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 5.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 4.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 3.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 2.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 2.7%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 4.5%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 3.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.9%, 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 2.6%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.5% Indoctrination: Publication 2.3%, sitewide 0.0% Bandwagon: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% 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