Speaker summary
50%6 analyzed articles/videos113.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These HHS results contain 11 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 39.8% saturation with 61.236 hits. Analysis detected 335.236 faulty-reasoning hits from 113.667 analyzed words across 6 articles, generating a BS Score of 14.1% and a BS Rank of 21% (22,590 of 28,364 speakers). This HHS is better (less manipulative) than 79.60% of the peer group.

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

20% percentile
025507510020.4% percentile
14.1% BS Score6 analyzed videos113.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 39.8%39.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 17.7%17.7%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Speaker 11.0%11.0%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Speaker 9.7%9.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 9.7%9.7%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 8.0%8.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 11.0%11.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 11.0%11.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 8.9%8.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 9.7%9.7%

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%Framing Effect: Speaker 39.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 19.0%, sitewide 19.2%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 17.7%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 11.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 8.9%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 11.0%, sitewide 5.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Speaker 11.0%, sitewide 1.4%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 8.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 3.3%Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 1.9%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 8.0%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate