Topic summary
⁠0%3 analyzed articles/videos2,509 analyzed words
BS Summary: These White House Correspondents Dinner Shooting results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Ad Hominem, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 7.2% saturation with 485 hits. Analysis detected 4,767 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,749 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠28% (11,226 of 15,399 topics). This White House Correspondents Dinner Shooting is better (less manipulative) than 72.90% of the peer group.

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

27% percentile
025507510027.1% percentile
2.1% BS Score2 analyzed articles6.7K 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 2.7%2.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.9%4.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 7.2%7.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.2%1.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.1%4.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.1%1.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.6%3.6%

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 2.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 5.3%Ad Hominem: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 2.2%Anecdotal: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 3.7%Unattributed Quote: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.8%Indoctrination: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos