Speaker summary
⁠66%1 analyzed article/video74.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Richard Flores results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias and Appeal to Authority, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 71.9% saturation with 60.38 hits. Analysis detected 151.38 faulty-reasoning hits from 74.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 53.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠75% (10,531 of 40,898 speakers). This Richard Flores is worse (more manipulative) than 74.30% of the peer group.
Richard Flores
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%MARGARET BRENNAN1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠75%Richard Flores (selected)54%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 74.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

74% percentile
025507510074.3% percentile
53.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos74.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 71.9%71.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 53.9%53.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 35.3%35.3%

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%Halo Effect: Speaker 71.9%, sitewide 6.7%In-Group Bias: Speaker 53.9%, sitewide 6.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 35.3%, sitewide 11.1%Halo EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos