Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,250 analyzed words
BS Summary: These White House Schedule results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Framing Effect, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21% saturation with 1,051 hits. Analysis detected 5,047 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,000 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3% and a BS Rank of ⁠50% (7,888 of 15,579 topics). This White House Schedule is better (less manipulative) than 50.60% of the peer group.
White House Schedule
Topic details
Total words: 5,000
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

49% percentile
025507510049.4% percentile
3.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles5K 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 10.6%10.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.7%4.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.1%2.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.4%1.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 12.7%12.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.0%1.0%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.0%1.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 4.1%4.1%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 1.1%1.1%Red HerringSitewide 0.7%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 10.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 21.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 12.7%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 6.9%Anecdotal: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.7%Red Herring: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 0.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.3%Tu Quoque: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 0.8%Bandwagon: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.4%Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos