Speaker summary
⁠88%1 analyzed article/video67.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Shami Chakrabarti results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Ad Hominem, and Begging the Question, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 90 hits. Analysis detected 337.5 faulty-reasoning hits from 67.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 75% and a BS Rank of ⁠81% (5,586 of 28,364 speakers). This Shami Chakrabarti is worse (more manipulative) than 80.30% of the peer group.
Shami Chakrabarti
Speaker details
Total words: 67.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

80% percentile
025507510080.3% percentile
75.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos67.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 15.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.7%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 2.0%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos