Speaker summary
⁠72%1 analyzed article/video30 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Bill Eigel results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Fundamental Attribution Error, In-Group Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Straw Man as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 21 hits. Analysis detected 126 faulty-reasoning hits from 30 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 53.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠73% (7,894 of 28,364 speakers). This Bill Eigel is worse (more manipulative) than 72.20% of the peer group.
Bill Eigel
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 30
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

72% percentile
025507510072.2% percentile
53.1% BS Score1 analyzed videos30 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 43.8%43.8%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 43.8%43.8%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Speaker 43.8%43.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 43.8%43.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 43.8%43.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Straw Man: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 43.8%, sitewide 2.7%In-Group Bias: Speaker 43.8%, sitewide 6.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 43.8%, sitewide 19.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Speaker 43.8%, sitewide 3.1%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 43.8%, sitewide 1.1%Straw ManSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos