Speaker summary
⁠87%2 analyzed articles/videos75 analyzed words
BS Summary: These The Oversight Project results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Indoctrination, and In-Group Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 66.7% saturation with 50 hits. Analysis detected 175 faulty-reasoning hits from 75 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 38.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠58% (12,138 of 28,364 speakers). This The Oversight Project is worse (more manipulative) than 57.20% of the peer group.
The Oversight Project
Speaker details
Total words: 75
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

57% percentile
025507510057.2% percentile
38.9% BS Score2 analyzed videos75 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 66.7%66.7%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 30.7%30.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 36.0%36.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 33.3%33.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 66.7%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 36.0%, sitewide 7.5%Indoctrination: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 0.0%In-Group Bias: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 6.9%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 1.4%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 30.7%, sitewide 1.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos