Publication summary
24% 91 analyzed articles/videos 39,541 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Houston Public Media results contain 52 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and Appeal to Authority , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 3.9% saturation with 7,283 hits . Analysis detected 81,273 faulty-reasoning hits from 188,266 analyzed words across 91 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.8% and a BS Rank of 12% (502 of 570 publications). This Houston Public Media is better (less manipulative) than 88.00% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 188,266
Article count: 91
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
12% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 12.0% percentile 0.8% BS Score91 analyzed articles188.3K 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 3.6% 3.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 3.9% 3.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 3.6% 3.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 2.5% 2.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 2.3% 2.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 1.7% 1.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 1.4% 1.4% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.2% 1.2% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 1.2% 1.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 1.0% 1.0% 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: Publication 3.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 3.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 3.6%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.3%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst