Speaker summary
⁠46%1 analyzed article/video97.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Philip Keiser results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Optimism Bias, and Framing Effect, with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 73 hits. Analysis detected 183 faulty-reasoning hits from 97.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 31.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠52% (21,608 of 44,534 speakers). This Philip Keiser is worse (more manipulative) than 51.50% of the peer group.
Philip Keiser
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠52%Philip Keiser (selected)32%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 97.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

52% percentile
025507510051.5% percentile
31.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos97.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 25.3%25.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 25.3%25.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 24.7%24.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Indoctrination: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.0%Framing Effect: Speaker 24.7%, sitewide 26.9%Loss Aversion: Speaker 25.3%, sitewide 2.5%Optimism Bias: Speaker 25.3%, sitewide 6.0%IndoctrinationSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos