Topic summary
⁠59%3 analyzed articles/videos2,439 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Pam Bondi results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 16.9% saturation with 1,646 hits. Analysis detected 10,138 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,756 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠42% (9,620 of 16,562 topics). This Pam Bondi is better (less manipulative) than 58.10% of the peer group.
Pam Bondi
Topic ranking list
Topic details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

42% percentile
025507510041.9% percentile
2.6% BS Score3 analyzed articles9.8K 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 16.4%16.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.5%1.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 7.9%7.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.9%0.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.4%0.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.4%0.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 8.8%8.8%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 3.4%3.4%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 6.0%6.0%

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 16.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 16.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 7.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 9.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 8.8%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 5.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 2.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 3.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.6%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 0.0%Unattributed Quote: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos