Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video68 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Mary Ignatius results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Begging the Question, Framing Effect, and Indoctrination, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 75% saturation with 57.375 hits. Analysis detected 267.75 faulty-reasoning hits from 68 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 60% and a BS Rank of ⁠75% (6,921 of 27,710 speakers). This Mary Ignatius is worse (more manipulative) than 75.00% of the peer group.
Mary Ignatius
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠0%Mike Muse1%
⁠0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
⁠75%Mary Ignatius (selected)60%
⁠100%4MATIV100%
⁠100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 68
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

75% percentile
025507510075.0% percentile
60.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos68 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 75.0%75.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 75.0%75.0%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 15.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 1.7%Framing Effect: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 26.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos