Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Impact Of AI On Creative Industries results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Framing Effect, and Anecdotal, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 25% saturation with 488 hits. Analysis detected 2,574 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,950 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This Impact Of AI On Creative Industries is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Impact Of AI On Creative Industries
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%Impact Of AI On Creative Industries (selected)0%
Topic details
Total words: 1,950
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 25.0%25.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.1%3.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 11.5%11.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.4%3.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.9%0.9%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Topic 6.8%6.8%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 10.2%10.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 15.7%15.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.9%0.9%Appeal to NatureSitewide 0.2%Topic 4.0%4.0%

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 11.5%, sitewide 26.9%Halo Effect: Topic 25.0%, sitewide 6.7%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 15.7%, sitewide 11.1%Anecdotal: Topic 10.2%, sitewide 5.2%Hasty Generalization: Topic 9.5%, sitewide 8.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.9%False Dilemma: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 1.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 4.6%Bandwagon: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Nature: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 0.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.3%Straw Man: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 0.9%Recency Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 0.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 0.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos