Speaker summary
⁠62%1 analyzed article/video60 analyzed words
BS Summary: These John Winkler results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Indoctrination, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 54 hits. Analysis detected 258.75 faulty-reasoning hits from 60 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 44% and a BS Rank of ⁠62% (11,041 of 28,364 speakers). This John Winkler is worse (more manipulative) than 61.10% of the peer group.
John Winkler
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 60
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

61% percentile
025507510061.1% percentile
44.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos60 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 66.7%66.7%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 58.3%58.3%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 16.7%16.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 33.3%33.3%

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 66.7%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 58.3%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 26.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 19.2%Begging the Question: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Speaker 16.7%, sitewide 1.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos