Speaker summary
⁠67%1 analyzed article/video101.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jonathan Underland results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Ad Hominem, and Appeal to Emotion, with Politically Left Leaning Bias as the most egregious example at 63.2% saturation with 96 hits. Analysis detected 260.875 faulty-reasoning hits from 101.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 23.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠39% (17,562 of 28,364 speakers). This Jonathan Underland is better (less manipulative) than 61.90% of the peer group.
Jonathan Underland
Speaker details
Total words: 101.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

38% percentile
025507510038.1% percentile
23.6% BS Score1 analyzed videos101.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Speaker 63.2%63.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 45.4%45.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 3.3%3.3%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 24.7%24.7%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Speaker 16.4%16.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 16.4%16.4%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 3.3%3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 16.4%16.4%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 63.2%, sitewide 2.0%Optimism Bias: Speaker 45.4%, sitewide 6.0%Framing Effect: Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 26.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 24.7%, sitewide 2.2%Negativity Bias: Speaker 16.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 16.4%, sitewide 15.9%Tu Quoque: Speaker 16.4%, sitewide 0.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 1.5%Politically Left Leaning BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos