Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video724 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Epstein Case results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 15.3% saturation with 442 hits. Analysis detected 2,443 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,896 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠53% (7,782 of 16,562 topics). This Epstein Case is worse (more manipulative) than 53.00% of the peer group.
Epstein Case
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠53%Epstein Case (selected)4%
⁠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: 2,896
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

53% percentile
025507510053.0% percentile
3.1% 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 7.5%7.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.9%5.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.4%2.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.3%1.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 15.3%15.3%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 4.4%4.4%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 0.6%0.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 5.2%5.2%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 2.7%2.7%

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 7.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 15.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 5.2%Unattributed Quote: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 1.1%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.3%Begging the Question: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 1.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 0.0%Recency Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 2.7%Straw Man: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 0.9%Primacy Effect: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 0.9%Bandwagon: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 1.9%False Dilemma: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos