Speaker summary
⁠40%1 analyzed article/video67 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tony Hinchcliffe results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice and Negativity Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 26.9% saturation with 18 hits. Analysis detected 54 faulty-reasoning hits from 67 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 26.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (16,060 of 28,364 speakers). This Tony Hinchcliffe is better (less manipulative) than 56.60% of the peer group.
Tony Hinchcliffe
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠0%Mike Muse1%
⁠0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
⁠44%Tony Hinchcliffe (selected)27%
⁠100%4MATIV100%
⁠100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 67
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

43% percentile
025507510043.4% percentile
26.9% BS Score1 analyzed videos67 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 26.9%26.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 26.9%26.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 26.9%26.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 26.9%, sitewide 0.8%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 26.9%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Speaker 26.9%, sitewide 19.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos