Angels could lose ‘Los Angeles’ in team name under new law 49%

By Josh Koehn0%

5/20/2026, 3:10:44 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Appeal to Emotion, and In-Group Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 34.8% saturation with 218 hits. Analysis detected 1,296 faulty-reasoning hits from 627 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 49.4% and a BS Rank of 49% (11,330 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 51.80% of the article peer group.

A California lawmaker is trying to force the perpetually godforsaken Los Angeles Angels to own up to an awkward truth  the baseball club doesn’t even play in LA. 
Assemblymember Avelino Valencia’s bill, AB 2512, would require the Major League Baseball franchise to go back to using the name “Anaheim Angels” in official documents and marketing materials. 
But that’s only if the city gives the team special legal treatment to help sell, lease or redevelop Angel Stadium and the surrounding land. 
The bill sailed through the Assembly this week with unanimous support and it now goes to the state Senate. 
“Anaheim is a world-class city, and I have seen it firsthand growing up here,” Valencia told The Post in a statement. 
“The pride of place our residents carry is real and it is earned. 
My community has shown up for the Angels franchise year after year, and they deserve more than being treated as an afterthought.” 
He added, “It is time the name of our local MLB team reflects the city they play in.” 
The conflict is also playing out at a local level, as the Anaheim Mayor Ashleigh Aitken reportedly instructed the city attorney to explore whether the Angels violated their lease by dropping the name Anaheim in legal documents. 
Officials for the Angels declined comment on the legislation. 
Valencia’s proposal revives one of Orange County’s longest-running sports grudges after owner Arte Moreno rebranded the franchise from the Anaheim Angels to the “Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim” in 2005 in a bid to capitalize on the larger LA media market. 
Anaheim later sued and lost, and by 2016, the team dropped Anaheim from its public branding altogether. 
The situation around the Angels and their stadium has only grown messier in the ensuing years. 
Anaheim and the Angels previously struck a deal that would have allowed the franchise to buy the 150-acre stadium property and develop the surrounding land. 
But the agreement collapsed following a federal corruption investigation involving former Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu. 
The state also challenged the arrangement under California’s Surplus Land Act, which generally requires public land to first be made available for affordable housing proposals before it is sold. 
Anaheim later agreed to a $96 million settlement. 
The Angels are currently in last place in MLB and have not made the playoffs since 2014. 
The club  parodied yet also celebrated in the 1994 kids classic film “Angels in the Outfield”  won its only World Series title in 2002 while still officially repping their hometown of Anaheim. 
The stadium has seen better days, as concessions were temporarily shut down last month due to a rodent infestation. 
Shirtless fans recently started a “sell the team!” 
chant targeting Moreno. 
And let’s not forget that opossum incident. 
Long-sufffering supporters of the team have rallied around Valencia’s bill and suggest it could have a karma-like effect on the Angels’ fortunes. 
“I know we suck, but I grew up with them and I still go watch games,” said Guadalupe Vasconcelos, an Angels fan who grew up in Orange County. 
“My dad used to take me when I was little, so that’s all I’ve known.” 
Vasconcelos said the vibe of an Angels game is radically different than going to Dodgers games. 
“I feel like fans are a little nicer to other teams’ [fans],” she said. 
Vasconcelos noted that many local fans never accepted the Los Angeles rebrand. 
“Most of my friends are actually Angels fans, too, and they were pretty upset when they were renamed the Los Angeles Angels  because like I said, it doesn’t make sense,” she said. 
“Maybe we’ll have a little bit more luck if we go back to being the Anaheim Angels.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.3%Josh Koehn: 3.9%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 1.1%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.5%Josh Koehn: 5.0%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic8.5%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.7%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 1.4%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.9%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Josh Koehn: 13.8%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect6.2%This article: 1.8%Josh Koehn: 0.9%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion1.8%This article: 5.3%Josh Koehn: 0.5%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.5%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.7%Josh Koehn: 1.2%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias5.7%This article: 4.6%Josh Koehn: 2.7%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias4.6%This article: 34.8%Josh Koehn: 25.9%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias34.8%This article: 11.0%Josh Koehn: 2.4%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias11.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 1.6%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 13.2%Josh Koehn: 2.2%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias13.2%This article: 2.6%Josh Koehn: 1.5%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.6%This article: 10.8%Josh Koehn: 1.4%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect10.8%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.8%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.3%Josh Koehn: 1.4%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias5.3%This article: 5.4%Josh Koehn: 0.9%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect5.4%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 5.6%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.4%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 2.4%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 2.1%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 1.9%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 5.3%Josh Koehn: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning5.3%This article: 8.5%Josh Koehn: 7.9%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization8.5%This article: 6.5%Josh Koehn: 3.2%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring6.5%This article: 9.3%Josh Koehn: 2.2%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon9.3%This article: 14.0%Josh Koehn: 7.2%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion14.0%This article: 2.9%Josh Koehn: 2.4%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question2.9%This article: 10.5%Josh Koehn: 3.6%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.5%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.6%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 1.6%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.3%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 22.2%Josh Koehn: 2.9%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal22.2%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.6%Josh Koehn: 1.3%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.6%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.3%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.7%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 2.7%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 1.9%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 4.6%Josh Koehn: 15.4%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice4.6%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 1.0%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.7%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 3.3%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Josh Koehn: 0.2%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

627 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers29%attributed speech446writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageAvelino Valencia • 21 words • 0.0% coverageAvelino Valencia • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAvelino Valencia • 22 words • 0.0% coverageAvelino Valencia • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageGuadalupe Vasconcelos • 28 words • 0.0% coverageGuadalupe Vasconcelos • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageGuadalupe Vasconcelos • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageGuadalupe Vasconcelos • 33 words • 0.0% coverageGuadalupe Vasconcelos • 17 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Guadalupe Vasconcelos

100%flagged-word coverage
107 attributed words59% of attributed speech65% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Biased Writer Voice-6.5 ptsWriter: 6.5%Guadalupe Vasconcelos: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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