Speaker summary
⁠73%4 analyzed articles/videos184.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Miami Herald results contain 18 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 45.8% saturation with 238 hits. Analysis detected 1,106 faulty-reasoning hits from 184.667 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 17.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠27% (20,761 of 28,364 speakers). This Miami Herald is better (less manipulative) than 73.20% of the peer group.
Miami Herald

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

27% percentile
025507510026.8% percentile
17.2% BS Score4 analyzed videos184.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 45.8%45.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 1.7%1.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 30.4%30.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 32.7%32.7%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Speaker 10.6%10.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 13.5%13.5%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 7.7%7.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 17.9%17.9%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 7.3%7.3%

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%120%120%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 4.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 45.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 32.7%, sitewide 15.9%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 30.4%, sitewide 7.5%Framing Effect: Speaker 1.7%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 17.9%, sitewide 11.1%Anecdotal: Speaker 13.5%, sitewide 5.2%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 13.5%, sitewide 9.1%Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 10.6%, sitewide 1.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 5.6%, sitewide 8.1%Burden of Proof: Speaker 7.7%, sitewide 0.4%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 7.3%, sitewide 1.1%Begging the Question: Speaker 6.0%, sitewide 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 3.3%Blind-Spot Bias: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 0.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 0.0%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 1.9%, sitewide 1.9%Anchoring BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos