Speaker summary
⁠52%1 analyzed article/video39.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Willa Paskin results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, False Dilemma, and Indoctrination, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 55 hits. Analysis detected 170 faulty-reasoning hits from 39.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 51.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠74% (10,690 of 40,076 speakers). This Willa Paskin is worse (more manipulative) than 73.30% of the peer group.
Willa Paskin
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%MARGARET BRENNAN1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠74%Willa Paskin (selected)52%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 39.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

73% percentile
025507510073.3% percentile
51.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos39.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 41.8%41.8%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 41.8%41.8%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 41.8%41.8%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 41.8%41.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 41.8%41.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 15.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 41.8%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 41.8%, sitewide 1.5%Indoctrination: Speaker 41.8%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 41.8%, sitewide 19.2%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 41.8%, sitewide 3.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos