Speaker summary
⁠68%2 analyzed articles/videos129.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Supreme National Security Council results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Circular Reasoning, with Bandwagon as the most egregious example at 58.4% saturation with 94 hits. Analysis detected 464.336 faulty-reasoning hits from 129.667 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 33.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠52% (13,633 of 28,364 speakers). This Supreme National Security Council is worse (more manipulative) than 51.90% of the peer group.
Supreme National Security Council
Speaker details
Total words: 129.667
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

52% percentile
025507510051.9% percentile
33.4% BS Score2 analyzed videos129.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Speaker 58.4%58.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 49.8%49.8%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 29.2%29.2%Circular ReasoningSitewide 0.1%Speaker 29.2%29.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 29.2%29.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 29.2%29.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 34.1%34.1%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 16.1%16.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 25.5%25.5%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Bandwagon: Speaker 58.4%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 49.8%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 34.1%, sitewide 19.2%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 29.2%, sitewide 5.3%Circular Reasoning: Speaker 29.2%, sitewide 0.1%Indoctrination: Speaker 29.2%, sitewide 0.0%In-Group Bias: Speaker 29.2%, sitewide 6.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 25.5%, sitewide 26.9%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 16.1%, sitewide 3.7%BandwagonSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos