Speaker summary
⁠62%2 analyzed articles/videos226.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Andrew Kim results contain 13 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, In-Group Bias, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 38.4% saturation with 124 hits. Analysis detected 449.033 faulty-reasoning hits from 226.333 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 11.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠17% (35,284 of 42,369 speakers). This Andrew Kim is better (less manipulative) than 83.30% of the peer group.
Andrew Kim
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠17%Andrew Kim (selected)12%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 226.333
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

17% percentile
025507510016.7% percentile
11.8% BS Score2 analyzed videos226.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 38.4%38.4%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 15.7%15.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 20.7%20.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 8.7%8.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 1.2%1.2%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 11.3%11.3%Genetic FallacySitewide 1.4%Speaker 10.5%10.5%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 8.7%8.7%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 7.1%7.1%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Speaker 7.1%7.1%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 38.4%, sitewide 15.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 20.7%, sitewide 8.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 8.7%, sitewide 19.2%Ad Hominem: Speaker 15.7%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Speaker 11.3%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 1.2%, sitewide 11.1%In-Group Bias: Speaker 10.8%, sitewide 6.9%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 10.5%, sitewide 7.5%Genetic Fallacy: Speaker 10.5%, sitewide 1.4%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 8.7%, sitewide 1.9%Bandwagon: Speaker 7.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 7.1%, sitewide 2.2%Burden of Proof: Speaker 2.5%, sitewide 0.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos