Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Restaurateur Controversy results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Indoctrination, and Appeal to Emotion, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 39.1% saturation with 1,330 hits. Analysis detected 5,454 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,400 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This Restaurateur Controversy is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Restaurateur Controversy
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%Restaurateur Controversy (selected)0%
Topic details
Total words: 3,400
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.4K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 39.1%39.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 6.5%6.5%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 11.4%11.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.0%1.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 8.2%8.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 25.8%25.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.7%2.7%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 4.8%4.8%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 5.1%5.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 5.2%5.2%

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%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 39.1%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 25.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 8.2%, sitewide 15.9%Indoctrination: Topic 11.4%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 7.4%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 5.2%Unattributed Quote: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 0.0%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 4.6%Red Herring: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 0.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.6%, sitewide 0.8%Begging the Question: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 1.7%Bandwagon: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos