Speaker summary
⁠69%1 analyzed article/video112 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Stuart Heritage results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Appeal to Emotion, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 75% saturation with 94.5 hits. Analysis detected 220.5 faulty-reasoning hits from 112 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 37.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠59% (18,880 of 45,352 speakers). This Stuart Heritage is worse (more manipulative) than 58.40% of the peer group.
Stuart Heritage
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠59%Stuart Heritage (selected)38%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 112
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

58% percentile
025507510058.4% percentile
37.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos112 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 75.0%75.0%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 25.0%25.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 25.0%25.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 25.0%25.0%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 19.2%Ad Hominem: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos