Speaker summary
⁠83%1 analyzed article/video94.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These James Goldgeier results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Appeal to Emotion, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 52.5% saturation with 53.536 hits. Analysis detected 323.928 faulty-reasoning hits from 94.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 42.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠60% (11,386 of 28,364 speakers). This James Goldgeier is worse (more manipulative) than 59.90% of the peer group.
James Goldgeier
Speaker details
Total words: 94.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

60% percentile
025507510059.9% percentile
42.1% BS Score1 analyzed videos94.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 47.5%47.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 52.5%52.5%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 36.8%36.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 36.8%36.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 47.5%47.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 47.5%47.5%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 26.4%26.4%

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 Authority: Speaker 52.5%, sitewide 11.1%Ad Hominem: Speaker 47.5%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 47.5%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 47.5%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 36.8%, sitewide 3.3%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 36.8%, sitewide 0.0%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 26.4%, sitewide 1.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos

From Eurovision to NATO⁠25%
Newsweek⁠36%By Jordan King⁠0%7/11/2026, 2:00:00 AM