Speaker summary
ā 92%1 analyzed article/video58.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Mick LaSalle results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, False Dilemma, and Recency Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 58.5 hits. Analysis detected 214.5 faulty-reasoning hits from 58.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 70% and a BS Rank of ā 80% (5,834 of 28,181 speakers). This Mick LaSalle is worse (more manipulative) than 79.30% of the peer group.
Mick LaSalle
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
ā 0%The Brookings Institution1%
ā 0%Gen Jack Keane1%
ā 0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
ā 0%Mike Muse1%
ā 0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
ā 80%Mick LaSalle (selected)70%
ā 100%4MATIV100%
ā 100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
ā 100%314 Action Fund100%
ā 100%21 Grams100%
ā 100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 58.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

79% percentile
025507510079.3% percentile
70.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos58.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0ā€“125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%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%120%120%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 4.6%False Dilemma: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.5%Recency Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 2.7%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos