Speaker summary
⁠85%2 analyzed articles/videos68.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These World Economic Forum results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Politically Left Leaning Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 82% saturation with 109 hits. Analysis detected 313 faulty-reasoning hits from 68.333 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 54.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠73% (7,228 of 25,889 speakers). This World Economic Forum is worse (more manipulative) than 72.10% of the peer group.
World Economic Forum
Speaker details
Total words: 68.333
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

72% percentile
025507510072.1% percentile
54.5% BS Score2 analyzed videos68.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 82.0%82.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 27.1%27.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 27.1%27.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 27.1%27.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 18.1%18.1%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Framing Effect: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 26.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 2.0%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 82.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 27.1%, sitewide 9.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 27.1%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 27.1%, sitewide 1.1%Optimism Bias: Speaker 18.1%, sitewide 6.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos