Speaker summary
⁠41%1 analyzed article/video214 analyzed words
BS Summary: These New York Daily News Editorial Board results contain 15 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and Hasty Generalization, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 83.4% saturation with 524 hits. Analysis detected 1,767 faulty-reasoning hits from 214 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 18.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠30% (19,938 of 28,364 speakers). This New York Daily News Editorial Board is better (less manipulative) than 70.30% of the peer group.
New York Daily News Editorial Board
Speaker details
Total words: 214
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

30% percentile
025507510029.7% percentile
18.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos214 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 83.4%83.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 39.5%39.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 23.1%23.1%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Speaker 15.1%15.1%Horn EffectSitewide 1.0%Speaker 11.0%11.0%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 10.8%10.8%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 9.6%9.6%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 6.2%6.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 8.8%8.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 20.9%20.9%

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%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 83.4%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Speaker 39.5%, sitewide 19.2%Framing Effect: Speaker 31.2%, sitewide 26.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 23.1%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 20.9%, sitewide 15.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 15.1%, sitewide 2.0%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 10.0%, sitewide 11.1%Horn Effect: Speaker 11.0%, sitewide 1.0%Ad Hominem: Speaker 10.8%, sitewide 2.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 9.6%, sitewide 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 8.8%, sitewide 3.3%In-Group Bias: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 6.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 6.2%, sitewide 0.0%Optimism Bias: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 6.0%Slippery Slope: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 1.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos