Speaker summary
⁠72%1 analyzed article/video20 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Border Network for Human Rights results contain 1 faulty reasoning type, including In-Group Bias, with In-Group Bias as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 20 hits. Analysis detected 20 faulty-reasoning hits from 20 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ⁠99% (744 of 45,145 speakers). This Border Network for Human Rights is worse (more manipulative) than 98.40% of the peer group.
Border Network for Human Rights
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠99%Border Network for Human Rights (selected)100%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 20
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

98% percentile
025507510098.4% percentile
100.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos20 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%In-Group Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 6.9%In-Group BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos