Publication summary
39% 1 analyzed article/video 1,031 analyzed words
BS Summary: These WCCB Charlotte results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Negativity Bias , and Optimism Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 8.8% saturation with 363 hits . Analysis detected 2,670 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,124 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 68% (191 of 584 publications). This WCCB Charlotte is worse (more manipulative) than 67.40% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 4,124
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
67% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 67.4% percentile 2.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.1K 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 8.8% 8.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 5.5% 5.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 3.1% 3.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 2.3% 2.3% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.3% 1.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 2.3% 2.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 6.1% 6.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 3.2% 3.2% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 1.9% 1.9% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% 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 8.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 5.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 3.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 6.1%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 3.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 2.3%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 2.7%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 2.1%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 3.1% Recency Bias: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 2.0% Pessimism Bias: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 1.9% Straw Man: Publication 1.8%, sitewide 0.9% Begging the Question: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst