Publication summary
28% 63 analyzed articles/videos 48,993 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Block Club Chicago results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Optimism Bias , and Halo Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 3.9% saturation with 8,191 hits . Analysis detected 94,586 faulty-reasoning hits from 207,640 analyzed words across 63 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.9% and a BS Rank of 11% (489 of 548 publications). This Block Club Chicago is better (less manipulative) than 89.20% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 207,640
Article count: 63
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
11% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 10.8% percentile 0.9% BS Score63 analyzed articles207.6K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Publication 2.5% 2.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 3.9% 3.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 3.5% 3.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 1.6% 1.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 2.1% 2.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 2.0% 2.0% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 1.5% 1.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.1% 1.1% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 1.2% 1.2% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Publication 0.7% 0.7% 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: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 3.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 3.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 3.3%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 3.3%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 2.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Publication 2.8%, sitewide 0.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst