Speaker summary
⁠61%2 analyzed articles/videos82.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Liberal Democratic Party results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Confirmation Bias, and Indoctrination, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 77.2% saturation with 88 hits. Analysis detected 277 faulty-reasoning hits from 82.5 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 34.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠54% (13,235 of 28,364 speakers). This Liberal Democratic Party is worse (more manipulative) than 53.30% of the peer group.
Liberal Democratic Party
Speaker details
Total words: 82.5
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

53% percentile
025507510053.3% percentile
34.7% BS Score2 analyzed videos82.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 77.2%77.2%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 32.5%32.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 32.5%32.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 32.5%32.5%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 22.8%22.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 22.8%22.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 22.8%22.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 77.2%, sitewide 1.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 32.5%, sitewide 0.8%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 32.5%, sitewide 7.5%Indoctrination: Speaker 32.5%, sitewide 0.0%Framing Effect: Speaker 22.8%, sitewide 26.9%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 22.8%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Speaker 22.8%, sitewide 19.2%Unattributed QuoteSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos