Speaker summary
⁠75%2 analyzed articles/videos164 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Confirmation Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 123 hits. Analysis detected 596.25 faulty-reasoning hits from 164 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 34.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠53% (13,405 of 28,364 speakers). This Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press is worse (more manipulative) than 52.70% of the peer group.
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Speaker details
Total words: 164
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

53% percentile
025507510052.7% percentile
34.1% BS Score2 analyzed videos164 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 53.7%53.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 34.8%34.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 26.8%26.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 26.8%26.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 34.8%34.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 23.2%23.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 23.2%23.2%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Halo Effect: Speaker 53.7%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Speaker 34.8%, sitewide 26.9%Slippery Slope: Speaker 34.8%, sitewide 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 26.8%, sitewide 0.8%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 26.8%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 23.2%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 23.2%, sitewide 19.2%Halo EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos