Speaker summary
⁠84%1 analyzed article/video142 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tom Sorel results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Halo Effect, and Hindsight Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 54.3% saturation with 77.111 hits. Analysis detected 252.111 faulty-reasoning hits from 142 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 15.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠24% (21,608 of 28,364 speakers). This Tom Sorel is better (less manipulative) than 76.20% of the peer group.
Tom Sorel
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 142
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

24% percentile
025507510023.8% percentile
15.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos142 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 54.3%54.3%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 23.4%23.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 20.1%20.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 8.2%8.2%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 9.0%9.0%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 1.6%1.6%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 5.3%5.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 4.1%4.1%

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 54.3%, sitewide 11.1%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 23.4%, sitewide 3.7%Halo Effect: Speaker 20.1%, sitewide 6.7%Negativity Bias: Speaker 8.2%, sitewide 19.2%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 9.0%, sitewide 1.4%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 5.3%, sitewide 4.0%Anecdotal: Speaker 4.1%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 1.6%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos