Topic summary
⁠12%5 analyzed articles/videos4,751 analyzed words
BS Summary: These City Council Meetings results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Anecdotal, and Ad Hominem, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 5.3% saturation with 1,012 hits. Analysis detected 7,742 faulty-reasoning hits from 19,004 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (21,170 of 22,216 topics). This City Council Meetings is better (less manipulative) than 95.30% of the peer group.
City Council Meetings

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

5% percentile
02550751004.7% percentile
1.0% BS Score5 analyzed articles19K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 2.3%2.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.5%1.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 5.2%5.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.1%2.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.6%0.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.1%0.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.6%2.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.7%1.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.3%1.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.9%0.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Framing Effect: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.3%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.0%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos