Speaker summary
⁠87%2 analyzed articles/videos94 analyzed words
BS Summary: These The Wall Street Journal editorial board results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Biased Writer Voice, and Negativity Bias, with Politically Right Leaning Bias as the most egregious example at 68.1% saturation with 64 hits. Analysis detected 154 faulty-reasoning hits from 94 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 41% and a BS Rank of ⁠59% (11,645 of 28,364 speakers). This The Wall Street Journal editorial board is worse (more manipulative) than 58.90% of the peer group.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

59% percentile
025507510058.9% percentile
41.0% BS Score2 analyzed videos94 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Speaker 68.1%68.1%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 31.9%31.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 31.9%31.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 31.9%31.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Speaker 68.1%, sitewide 1.4%Ad Hominem: Speaker 31.9%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 31.9%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Speaker 31.9%, sitewide 19.2%Politically Right Leaning BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos