Speaker summary
⁠85%1 analyzed article/video27 analyzed words
BS Summary: These George Hendricks results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Optimism Bias, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 39.5% saturation with 17 hits. Analysis detected 61 faulty-reasoning hits from 27 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 43.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠61% (11,178 of 28,364 speakers). This George Hendricks is worse (more manipulative) than 60.60% of the peer group.
George Hendricks
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠0%Mike Muse1%
⁠0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
⁠61%George Hendricks (selected)44%
⁠100%4MATIV100%
⁠100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 27
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

61% percentile
025507510060.6% percentile
43.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos27 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 39.5%39.5%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 25.6%25.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 25.6%25.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 25.6%25.6%

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%In-Group Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 6.9%Anecdotal: Speaker 39.5%, sitewide 5.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 25.6%, sitewide 15.9%Optimism Bias: Speaker 25.6%, sitewide 6.0%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 25.6%, sitewide 0.0%In-Group BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos