Speaker summary
⁠67%3 analyzed articles/videos51.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Iran's military command results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 45.3% saturation with 39 hits. Analysis detected 185 faulty-reasoning hits from 51.333 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 67.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠81% (8,886 of 45,145 speakers). This Iran's military command is worse (more manipulative) than 80.30% of the peer group.
Iran's military command
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠81%Iran's military command (selected)68%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

80% percentile
025507510080.3% percentile
67.2% BS Score3 analyzed videos51.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 45.4%45.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 45.4%45.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 45.4%45.4%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 15.9%Slippery Slope: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 1.7%Framing Effect: Speaker 45.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 45.4%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 45.4%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos