Speaker summary
⁠33%2 analyzed articles/videos230.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Michael Fine results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Availability Heuristic, and Pessimism Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 20.2% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 152 faulty-reasoning hits from 230.333 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 11.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠17% (37,818 of 45,128 speakers). This Michael Fine is better (less manipulative) than 83.80% of the peer group.
Michael Fine
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠17%Michael Fine (selected)12%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 230.333
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

16% percentile
025507510016.2% percentile
11.4% BS Score2 analyzed videos230.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 6.0%6.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 20.2%20.2%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 10.1%10.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 10.8%10.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 10.1%10.1%

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%Framing Effect: Speaker 6.0%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 20.2%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 10.8%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 10.1%, sitewide 9.1%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 10.1%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos