Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Economic Crash results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Confirmation Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 8.7% saturation with 505 hits. Analysis detected 2,629 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,792 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This Economic Crash is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Economic Crash
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠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%
⁠0%Economic Crash (selected)0%
Topic details
Total words: 5,792
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.8K 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 8.7%8.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 2.3%2.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.9%2.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.1%2.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.6%1.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.9%0.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.5%0.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.1%3.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.8%3.8%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.0%1.0%

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 8.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.9%Anchoring Bias: Topic 6.2%, sitewide 4.0%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.6%Bandwagon: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.5%Composition/Division: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.2%Dunning-Kruger Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 0.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.0%Indoctrination: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos

Get Ready for the AI Crash⁠17%
Washington Monthly⁠52%By Anne Kim⁠48%5/6/2026, 2:00:00 AM