Publication summary
97% 194 analyzed articles/videos 27,479 analyzed words
BS Summary: These The Washington Post results contain 52 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Biased Writer Voice , and Appeal to Emotion , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 21.5% saturation with 24,916 hits . Analysis detected 158,718 faulty-reasoning hits from 115,982 analyzed words across 193 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of 78% (126 of 553 publications). This The Washington Post is worse (more manipulative) than 77.40% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 115,982
Article count: 193
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
77% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 77.4% percentile 2.6% BS Score193 analyzed articles116K 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% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 15.1% 15.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 6.3% 6.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 5.2% 5.2% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Publication 21.5% 21.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 2.1% 2.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 2.1% 2.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 4.9% 4.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 3.7% 3.7% Unattributed Quote Sitewide 1.1% Publication 4.7% 4.7% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Publication 1.9% 1.9% 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 21.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 18.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 6.3%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 15.1%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Authority: Publication 5.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 4.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 5.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 3.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 3.6%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 5.2% Unattributed Quote: Publication 4.7%, sitewide 1.1% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 4.6% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 4.5%, sitewide 3.3% Anchoring Bias: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 1.5%, sitewide 3.7% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 3.6%, sitewide 2.0% Pessimism Bias: Publication 3.5%, sitewide 1.9% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 3.1% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Publication 2.8%, sitewide 0.8% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 2.4%, sitewide 2.7% Quote-first Misdirection: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 0.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst