Speaker summary
57% 36 analyzed articles/videos 1,081.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These US Central Command results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Biased Writer Voice , and Ambiguity (Equivocation) , with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 24.4% saturation with 321.007 hits . Analysis detected 2,028.728 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,081.333 analyzed words across 36 articles and videos, generating a BS Score of 5.1% and a BS Rank of 3% (27,611 of 28,364 speakers). This US Central Command is better (less manipulative) than 97.30% of the peer group. US Central Command
Speaker details
Total words: 1,081.333
Content count: 36
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed speakers
3% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 2.7% percentile 5.1% BS Score36 analyzed videos1.1K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Speaker 24.4% 24.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Speaker 3.2% 3.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Speaker 7.0% 7.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Speaker 9.3% 9.3% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Speaker 11.1% 11.1% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Speaker 1.4% 1.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Speaker 2.8% 2.8% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Speaker 7.1% 7.1% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Speaker 2.4% 2.4% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Speaker 0.7% 0.7% 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% Framing Effect: Speaker 23.9%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Authority: Speaker 24.4%, sitewide 11.1% Negativity Bias: Speaker 7.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 3.2%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 11.1%, sitewide 5.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 9.3%, sitewide 0.8% Availability Heuristic: Speaker 6.1%, sitewide 9.1% Confirmation Bias: Speaker 6.6%, sitewide 7.5% Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 7.1%, sitewide 3.3% In-Group Bias: Speaker 1.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Speaker 2.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Speaker 2.4%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 4.6% Begging the Question: Speaker 4.5%, sitewide 1.7% Anchoring Bias: Speaker 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 3.8%, sitewide 3.7% Actor-Observer Bias: Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 0.6% Status Quo Bias: Speaker 3.1%, sitewide 2.2% Unattributed Quote: Speaker 3.1%, sitewide 1.1% Recency Bias: Speaker 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Circular Reasoning: Speaker 2.4%, sitewide 0.1% Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 0.8%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Speaker 1.7%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Speaker rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst