Speaker summary
⁠46%1 analyzed article/video69.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Christopher Steele results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Halo Effect, and Optimism Bias, with In-Group Bias as the most egregious example at 58.6% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 160 faulty-reasoning hits from 69.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 34.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠55% (17,407 of 38,646 speakers). This Christopher Steele is worse (more manipulative) than 55.00% of the peer group.
Christopher Steele
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%MARGARET BRENNAN1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠55%Christopher Steele (selected)35%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 69.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

55% percentile
025507510055.0% percentile
34.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos69.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 58.6%58.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 29.3%29.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 20.7%20.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 29.3%29.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%In-Group Bias: Speaker 58.6%, sitewide 6.9%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 29.3%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Speaker 29.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Speaker 20.7%, sitewide 6.0%In-Group BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos