Speaker summary
⁠84%1 analyzed article/video79 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Martha Mamdani results contain 10 faulty reasoning types, including False Dilemma, Framing Effect, and Indoctrination, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 48.1% saturation with 38 hits. Analysis detected 232 faulty-reasoning hits from 79 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 29.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠47% (14,047 of 26,155 speakers). This Martha Mamdani is better (less manipulative) than 53.70% of the peer group.
Martha Mamdani

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

46% percentile
025507510046.3% percentile
29.4% BS Score1 analyzed videos79 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 36.7%36.7%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 36.7%36.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 48.1%48.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 36.7%36.7%Actor-Observer BiasSitewide 0.6%Speaker 27.9%27.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 27.9%27.9%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 36.7%36.7%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 11.4%11.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 27.9%27.9%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Speaker 3.8%3.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 48.1%, sitewide 15.9%False Dilemma: Speaker 36.7%, sitewide 1.5%Framing Effect: Speaker 36.7%, sitewide 26.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 36.7%, sitewide 0.0%In-Group Bias: Speaker 36.7%, sitewide 6.9%Actor-Observer Bias: Speaker 27.9%, sitewide 0.6%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 27.9%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Speaker 27.9%, sitewide 19.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 11.4%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Speaker 3.8%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos