Topic summary
⁠82%1 analyzed article/video793 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ethical Consumerism results contain 21 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Biased Writer Voice, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 36.9% saturation with 879 hits. Analysis detected 2,101 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,379 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠70% (5,082 of 16,562 topics). This Ethical Consumerism is worse (more manipulative) than 69.30% of the peer group.
Ethical Consumerism
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠70%Ethical Consumerism (selected)5%
⁠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: 2,379
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

69% percentile
025507510069.3% percentile
4.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.4K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 37.0%37.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 2.4%2.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 16.6%16.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.0%2.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.5%4.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.1%2.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.0%1.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.1%3.1%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.3%1.3%

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%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 37.0%, sitewide 0.5%Framing Effect: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 19.2%Halo Effect: Topic 16.6%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.1%, sitewide 3.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.1%, sitewide 0.8%Recency Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.7%Indoctrination: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Nature: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or ServiceSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos