Topic summary
⁠2%1 analyzed article/video700 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Campaign Schedules results contain 11 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Bandwagon, and Optimism Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 3.4% saturation with 95 hits. Analysis detected 337 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,800 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠6% (21,602 of 22,944 topics). This Campaign Schedules is better (less manipulative) than 94.20% of the peer group.
Campaign Schedules
Topic details
Total words: 2,800
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

6% percentile
02550751005.8% percentile
1.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.8K 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 3.4%3.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.8%0.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.3%1.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.9%1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 0.4%0.4%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Topic 0.9%0.9%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Topic 1.3%1.3%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Topic 1.0%1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 0.3%0.3%

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 3.4%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 9.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 5.3%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.3%Bandwagon: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 0.3%, sitewide 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 0.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos