Speaker summary
⁠97%3 analyzed articles/videos112 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Douglas Herman results contain 11 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Negativity Bias, and Hasty Generalization, with Ad Hominem as the most egregious example at 88.6% saturation with 99.252 hits. Analysis detected 547.022 faulty-reasoning hits from 112 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 41.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠60% (11,557 of 28,364 speakers). This Douglas Herman is worse (more manipulative) than 59.30% of the peer group.
Douglas Herman
Speaker details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

59% percentile
025507510059.3% percentile
41.4% BS Score3 analyzed videos112 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 88.6%88.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 68.3%68.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 58.8%58.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 65.8%65.8%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Speaker 31.7%31.7%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 24.6%24.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 41.3%41.3%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 17.5%17.5%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 17.5%17.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 23.8%23.8%

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%Ad Hominem: Speaker 88.6%, sitewide 2.2%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 68.3%, sitewide 8.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 65.8%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 58.8%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 41.3%, sitewide 19.2%Straw Man: Speaker 31.7%, sitewide 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 24.6%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 23.8%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 17.5%, sitewide 7.5%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 17.5%, sitewide 3.7%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 17.5%, sitewide 1.1%Ad HominemSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos