Speaker summary
⁠34%1 analyzed article/video69 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jay Storz results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Pessimism Bias, and Framing Effect, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 32.6% saturation with 30 hits. Analysis detected 91 faulty-reasoning hits from 69 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 18% and a BS Rank of ⁠29% (20,224 of 28,165 speakers). This Jay Storz is better (less manipulative) than 71.80% of the peer group.
Jay Storz
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%
⁠29%Jay Storz (selected)18%
⁠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: 69
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

28% percentile
025507510028.2% percentile
18.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos69 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 32.6%32.6%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 20.8%20.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 12.0%12.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 20.6%20.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 12.0%12.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 9.8%9.8%

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%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 32.6%, sitewide 0.8%Framing Effect: Speaker 12.0%, sitewide 26.9%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 20.8%, sitewide 1.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 11.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 12.0%, sitewide 19.2%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 9.8%, sitewide 5.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos