Speaker summary
⁠66%2 analyzed articles/videos148.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington results contain 14 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Politically Left Leaning Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 31.3% saturation with 81 hits. Analysis detected 444.741 faulty-reasoning hits from 148.5 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 16.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠26% (21,178 of 28,364 speakers). This Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington is better (less manipulative) than 74.70% of the peer group.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Speaker details
Total words: 148.5
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

25% percentile
025507510025.3% percentile
16.5% BS Score2 analyzed videos148.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 44.7%44.7%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 25.6%25.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 31.3%31.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 23.3%23.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 10.0%10.0%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 19.3%19.3%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Speaker 16.6%16.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 1.9%1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 10.4%10.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 17.0%17.0%

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%In-Group Bias: Speaker 44.7%, sitewide 6.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 31.3%, sitewide 11.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 10.0%, sitewide 26.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 25.6%, sitewide 1.7%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 23.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 19.3%, sitewide 4.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 13.1%, sitewide 19.2%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 17.0%, sitewide 7.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 16.6%, sitewide 2.0%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 1.9%, sitewide 15.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 10.4%, sitewide 0.8%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 8.9%, sitewide 9.1%Genetic Fallacy: Speaker 6.6%, sitewide 1.4%Loss Aversion: Speaker 1.9%, sitewide 2.5%In-Group BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos