Speaker summary
⁠83%1 analyzed article/video60 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Gib Brogan results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Ad Hominem, and Appeal to Authority, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 87.5% saturation with 70 hits. Analysis detected 280 faulty-reasoning hits from 60 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 60.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠76% (6,954 of 28,364 speakers). This Gib Brogan is worse (more manipulative) than 75.50% of the peer group.
Gib Brogan
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 60
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

76% percentile
025507510075.5% percentile
60.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos60 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 87.5%87.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 75.0%75.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 75.0%75.0%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 62.5%62.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 37.5%37.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 37.5%37.5%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 87.5%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 8.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 62.5%, sitewide 26.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 2.2%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 37.5%, sitewide 7.5%Negativity Bias: Speaker 37.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos