Speaker summary
⁠60%1 analyzed article/video76 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Red Hat results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect and Appeal to Emotion, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 42.1% saturation with 32 hits. Analysis detected 76 faulty-reasoning hits from 76 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 33.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠52% (13,741 of 28,364 speakers). This Red Hat is worse (more manipulative) than 51.60% of the peer group.
Red Hat
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 76
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

52% percentile
025507510051.6% percentile
33.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos76 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 42.1%42.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 23.7%23.7%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 34.2%34.2%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 42.1%, sitewide 11.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 34.2%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 23.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos