Speaker summary
⁠37%1 analyzed article/video48 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Dave Rader results contain 2 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 36 hits. Analysis detected 72 faulty-reasoning hits from 48 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 50% and a BS Rank of ⁠71% (11,006 of 37,766 speakers). This Dave Rader is worse (more manipulative) than 70.90% of the peer group.
Dave Rader
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%MARGARET BRENNAN1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠71%Dave Rader (selected)50%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 48
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

71% percentile
025507510070.9% percentile
50.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos48 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos