Speaker summary
⁠82%1 analyzed article/video41.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Noelle Clennon results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Quote-first Misdirection, Framing Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 46.5 hits. Analysis detected 174.375 faulty-reasoning hits from 41.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 75% and a BS Rank of ⁠82% (8,184 of 45,513 speakers). This Noelle Clennon is worse (more manipulative) than 82.00% of the peer group.
Noelle Clennon
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠82%Noelle Clennon (selected)75%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 41.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

82% percentile
025507510082.0% percentile
75.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos41.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 75.0%75.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 26.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos