Speaker summary
42% 24 analyzed articles/videos 847.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These IRGC results contain 21 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias , False Dilemma , and Negativity Bias , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 23.9% saturation with 344 hits . Analysis detected 1,702.365 faulty-reasoning hits from 847.667 analyzed words across 24 articles, generating a BS Score of 5.9% and a BS Rank of 4% (25,734 of 26,730 speakers). This IRGC is better (less manipulative) than 96.30% of the peer group. IRGC
Speaker details
Total words: 847.667
Article count: 24
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed speakers
4% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 3.7% percentile 5.9% BS Score24 analyzed videos847.7 analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Speaker 9.8% 9.8% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Speaker 20.1% 20.1% False Dilemma Sitewide 1.5% Speaker 14.3% 14.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Speaker 9.7% 9.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Speaker 23.9% 23.9% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Speaker 1.5% 1.5% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Speaker 0.9% 0.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Speaker 0.5% 0.5% Special Pleading Sitewide 0.3% Speaker 5.3% 5.3% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Speaker 6.8% 6.8% 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 9.8%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 23.9%, sitewide 15.9% Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 20.1%, sitewide 3.7% Negativity Bias: Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 19.2% False Dilemma: Speaker 14.3%, sitewide 1.5% Appeal to Authority: Speaker 6.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Speaker 0.5%, sitewide 6.9% Ad Hominem: Speaker 6.8%, sitewide 2.2% Special Pleading: Speaker 5.3%, sitewide 0.3% Anecdotal: Speaker 2.1%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 3.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 0.8% Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 1.9%, sitewide 2.7% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Speaker 2.6%, sitewide 1.4% Slippery Slope: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 1.7% Actor-Observer Bias: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 0.6% Unattributed Quote: Speaker 1.4%, sitewide 1.1% Straw Man: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 0.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Speaker rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst