NTD100%

German Audience Moved by Shen Yun Documentary 99%

7/22/2026, 4:30:38 AM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Representativeness Heuristic, and Overconfidence Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 62% saturation with 114 hits. Analysis detected 911 faulty-reasoning hits from 184 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 99.6% and a BS Rank of 99% (254 of 19,908 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 98.70% of the video peer group.

Also, ich fand den Film äußerst spannend, sehr beeindruckend. 
Ich hatte ja vor einigen Jahren, also in Berlin die Chance gehabt, äh live bei einer Show dabei zu sein. 
Ähm und ich war damals schon wirklich sehr beeindruckt von den ganzen Bewegungen, von der Musik, von der Harmonie, von Bewegung und Musik. 
Und jetzt gerade durch den Film noch mal habe ich einen ganz anderen Blick bekommen auf die auf die auf die Kulissen dahinter, wie das alles abläuft, wie die Tänzer damit umgehen und dass sie trotz diesen äh starken diesen vielen Drohungen ähm diesen Fokus behalten und nach dieser Perfektion streben und es auch bei jeder ihrer Performan äh aus, also bei jeder ihrer Performanzen ähm so ausstrahlen, diese Perfektion und dieses diesen Fokus trotz dieser Bedrohung, den sie ständig ausgesetzt sind. 
Ich wünsche Shenün, dass sie durch die Liebe, das ist ja eigentlich die stärkste Kraft, die Liebe, egal, Liebe zu dem, was man macht, Liebe zu allem und dass das bewahrt wird und dass sie dadurch auch die Kraft ziehen und weitermachen. 
Oh. 
Confirmation Bias
10.9%
Anchoring Bias
12.5%
Availability Heuristic
14.7%
Representativeness Heuristic
44.6%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
44.6%
Framing Effect
27.2%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
27.7%
Pessimism Bias
0.5%
Negativity Bias
0%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
53.3%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
12.5%
Primacy Effect
4.9%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0.5%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
44.6%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
26.6%
Begging the Question
23.4%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
11.4%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0.5%
Anecdotal
28.3%
No True Scotsman
44.6%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
62%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

184 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.