Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video94 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Seattle Now results contain 12 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Loss Aversion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 57.1% saturation with 161 hits. Analysis detected 562 faulty-reasoning hits from 282 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 16.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠98% (404 of 16,562 topics). This Seattle Now is worse (more manipulative) than 97.60% of the peer group.
Seattle Now
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 282
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

98% percentile
025507510097.6% percentile
16.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles282 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 57.1%57.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 27.7%27.7%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Topic 20.9%20.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.5%3.5%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 17.0%17.0%Primacy EffectSitewide 0.9%Topic 8.5%8.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 23.1%23.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 13.1%13.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 5.3%5.3%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Topic 7.1%7.1%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Framing Effect: Topic 57.1%, sitewide 26.9%In-Group Bias: Topic 27.7%, sitewide 6.9%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 23.1%, sitewide 15.9%Loss Aversion: Topic 20.9%, sitewide 2.5%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 19.2%Recency Bias: Topic 17.0%, sitewide 2.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 13.8%, sitewide 9.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 13.1%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Authority: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 11.1%Primacy Effect: Topic 8.5%, sitewide 0.9%False Dilemma: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 1.5%Halo Effect: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 6.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos