Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video100.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tom Clare results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Straw Man, with Ad Hominem as the most egregious example at 49.8% saturation with 53.763 hits. Analysis detected 157.763 faulty-reasoning hits from 100.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 19.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠33% (30,327 of 45,128 speakers). This Tom Clare is better (less manipulative) than 67.20% of the peer group.
Tom Clare
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠33%Tom Clare (selected)20%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 100.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

33% percentile
025507510032.8% percentile
19.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos100.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 49.8%49.8%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Speaker 29.2%29.2%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 20.5%20.5%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Speaker 12.6%12.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 8.0%8.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 13.9%13.9%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 1.3%1.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Ad Hominem: Speaker 49.8%, sitewide 2.2%Straw Man: Speaker 29.2%, sitewide 0.9%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 20.5%, sitewide 3.7%Negativity Bias: Speaker 8.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 13.9%, sitewide 15.9%Tu Quoque: Speaker 12.6%, sitewide 0.2%Indoctrination: Speaker 1.3%, sitewide 0.0%Ad HominemSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos