Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video725 analyzed words
BS Summary: These David Letterman results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Appeal to Emotion, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 12.5% saturation with 363 hits. Analysis detected 2,630 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,900 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠43% (9,045 of 15,856 topics). This David Letterman is better (less manipulative) than 57.00% of the peer group.
David Letterman
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠43%David Letterman (selected)3%
⁠100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
⁠100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
Topic details
Total words: 2,900
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

43% percentile
025507510043.0% percentile
2.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.9K 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 2.8%2.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 7.1%7.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 7.8%7.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 12.5%12.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.8%0.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.3%2.3%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 3.7%3.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 4.3%4.3%

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 2.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 12.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 8.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 0.5%Confirmation Bias: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.5%, sitewide 3.3%Ad Hominem: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 2.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 3.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.0%Indoctrination: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos