Author summary
⁠9%2 analyzed articles/videos17,193 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Texas Tribune Staff results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Availability Heuristic, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8% saturation with 5,486 hits. Analysis detected 16,659 faulty-reasoning hits from 68,772 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠2% (9,160 of 9,307 authors). This Texas Tribune Staff is better (less manipulative) than 98.40% of the peer group.
Texas Tribune Staff
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
⁠2%Texas Tribune Staff (selected)1%
⁠100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 68,772
Article count: 2
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

2% percentile
02550751001.6% percentile
0.7% BS Score2 analyzed articles68.8K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 1.2%1.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 1.0%1.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 8.0%8.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 2.3%2.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 0.2%0.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.1%2.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 0.3%0.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 0.0%0.0%

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: Author 1.2%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 8.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 2.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 0.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 0.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Author 0.0%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos