Speaker summary
⁠38%1 analyzed article/video40.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hillary Ronen results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Begging the Question, Framing Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 27 hits. Analysis detected 108 faulty-reasoning hits from 40.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 50% and a BS Rank of ⁠69% (8,959 of 28,364 speakers). This Hillary Ronen is worse (more manipulative) than 68.40% of the peer group.
Hillary Ronen
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%
⁠69%Hillary Ronen (selected)50%
⁠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: 40.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

68% percentile
025507510068.4% percentile
50.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos40.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%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%Begging the Question: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.7%Framing Effect: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos