Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video680 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Campaign Scandal results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 25.3% saturation with 688 hits. Analysis detected 3,040 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,720 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠60% (6,339 of 15,535 topics). This Campaign Scandal is worse (more manipulative) than 59.20% of the peer group.
Campaign Scandal
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 2,720
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

59% percentile
025507510059.2% percentile
3.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.7K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 11.1%11.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.8%0.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 11.8%11.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 25.3%25.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.8%3.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.8%0.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.8%1.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 12.1%12.1%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 2.4%2.4%

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: Topic 11.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 25.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 12.1%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 11.8%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 5.2%Recency Bias: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 2.7%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 3.7%Bandwagon: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 2.2%Genetic Fallacy: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.0%Indoctrination: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.0%False Dilemma: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 1.9%Burden of Proof: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.4%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos