Dramatic video shows gunshots ring out in Times Square, sending tourists running for their lives ⁠48%

By Khristina Narizhnaya⁠0% Daniel Cody⁠38%

6/18/2026, 11:03:24 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Appeal to Authority, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 40.7% saturation with 103 hits. Analysis detected 619 faulty-reasoning hits from 253 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 49% and a BS Rank of ⁠48% (11,510 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 52.60% of the article peer group.

Several gunshots rang out during a dispute in the heart of Times Square on Thursday afternoon, sending panicked tourists and commuters scrambling for safety. 
Wild video shows at least two people in black clothing open fire with what appears to be handguns as they step into the tourist-packed intersection. 
Nobody was struck by the gunfire, but a bullet did hit a car when at least one gunman opened fire near West 44th Street and Seventh Avenue just after 3:30 p.m., cops and witnesses said. 
“There were shots fired, and my car got hit in the hood,” Bonnie White told The Post. 
“I just heard the shots fired, and I seen the guy,” she said “I’m pissed. 
I’m so mad. 
I don’t know what’s going to happen to my car.” 
Police said several people were involved in a fight that exploded into gunfire. 
Witnesses reported hearing about five shots and wild video captured that moment, showing scores of people bolt for cover. 
“One dude shot another dude and the police got him,” an eyewitness, who declined to give his name, told The Post. 
“I didn’t hear no fight, I just heard shots. 
“It’s unfortunate,” the witness said.  
“This is supposed to be the best day out here in New York. 
The Knicks took the W, that’s all we ever wanted for 53 years.” 
A gun was recovered at the scene and one suspect is in custody. 
Charges are pending.  
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.7%Khristina Narizhnaya: 2.4%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias8.7%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 17.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 5.3%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic17.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 1.3%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 20.9%Khristina Narizhnaya: 19.2%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect20.9%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.1%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.5%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias5.1%This article: 5.1%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.5%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect5.1%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 1.3%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.9%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.6%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias5.9%This article: 40.7%Khristina Narizhnaya: 22.6%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias40.7%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.9%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.5%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 2.7%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 4.3%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 1.3%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.5%Khristina Narizhnaya: 2.0%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.6%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 13.9%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 1.9%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 24.1%Khristina Narizhnaya: 3.8%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority24.1%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 1.7%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 2.7%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 27.7%Khristina Narizhnaya: 8.4%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion27.7%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.3%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.5%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 1.0%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof4.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 18.6%Khristina Narizhnaya: 1.8%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal18.6%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 18.2%Khristina Narizhnaya: 2.3%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)18.2%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 8.1%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.3%Khristina Narizhnaya: 3.0%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote8.3%This article: 9.9%Khristina Narizhnaya: 3.5%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection9.9%This article: 22.9%Khristina Narizhnaya: 22.7%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice22.9%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.7%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 17.0%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Khristina Narizhnaya: 0.0%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

253 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker18%attributed speech208writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageBonnie White • 17 words • 0.0% coverageBonnie White • 15 words • 0.0% coverageBonnie White • 3 words • 0.0% coverageBonnie White • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Bonnie White

100%flagged-word coverage
45 attributed words100% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Biased Writer Voice-27.9 ptsWriter: 27.9%Bonnie White: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-12.0 ptsWriter: 12.0%Bonnie White: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-10.1 ptsWriter: 10.1%Bonnie White: 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.