Speaker summary
⁠32%2 analyzed articles/videos4,886 analyzed words
BS Summary: These MARGARET BRENNAN results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, False Dilemma, and Burden of Proof, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 3.5% saturation with 171 hits. Analysis detected 862 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,886 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (35,813 of 35,816 speakers). This MARGARET BRENNAN is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
MARGARET BRENNAN
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%MARGARET BRENNAN (selected)1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 4,886
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.7% BS Score2 analyzed videos4.9K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 0.1%0.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 3.5%3.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 0.9%0.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 0.7%0.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 0.4%0.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 0.3%0.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 0.4%0.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 0.2%0.2%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 2.0%2.0%

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%Framing Effect: Speaker 0.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 0.7%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 0.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 0.4%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Speaker 0.3%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 0.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Speaker 2.0%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 0.2%, sitewide 4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 0.7%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Speaker 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Speaker 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 0.1%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Speaker 1.6%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 0.1%, sitewide 1.4%Burden of Proof: Speaker 1.4%, sitewide 0.4%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 0.3%, sitewide 1.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 0.4%, sitewide 0.8%Red Herring: Speaker 0.6%, sitewide 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Speaker 0.3%, sitewide 0.5%Indoctrination: Speaker 0.1%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos