Publication summary
90% 431 analyzed articles/videos 465,939 analyzed words
BS Summary: These the Guardian results contain 54 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Hasty Generalization , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.1% saturation with 213,015 hits . Analysis detected 1,931,635 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,118,247 analyzed words across 427 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.7% and a BS Rank of 55% (258 of 564 publications). This the Guardian is worse (more manipulative) than 54.40% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 2,118,247
Article count: 427
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
54% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 54.4% percentile 1.7% BS Score427 analyzed articles2.1M 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 5.8% 5.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 5.3% 5.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 10.1% 10.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 3.5% 3.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 3.0% 3.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.2% 1.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 9.8% 9.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 3.5% 3.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 2.9% 2.9% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Publication 2.4% 2.4% 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 5.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 10.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 5.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 3.5%, sitewide 11.1% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 9.8%, sitewide 5.3% Availability Heuristic: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 6.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 3.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 2.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 2.4%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 1.5%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 1.5%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 2.8%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 3.1% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 2.9%, sitewide 2.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst