Logan Webb apologizes for social media comments ⁠11%

By John Shea⁠22%

7/10/2026, 6:00:03 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Recency Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 30% saturation with 66 hits. Analysis detected 322 faulty-reasoning hits from 220 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (19,618 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 89.60% of the article peer group.

Logan Webb apologizes for social media comments, vows to quit X: ‘My last hurrah’ 
The Giants ace deleted his account after replying to a reporter and fans who criticized the team. 
Logan Webb allowed five earned runs in the Giants’ 10-0 defeat to the Blue Jays on Wednesday at Oracle Park. 
| Source: Thearon W. 
Henderson/Getty Images 
By John Shea Sports Reporter 
For subscribers Published Jul. 10, 2026 at 1:00pm 
Email (opens in new tab) 
Twitter (opens in new tab) 
Bluesky (opens in new tab) 
Facebook (opens in new tab) 
LinkedIn (opens in new tab) 
Telegram (opens in new tab) 
WhatsApp (opens in new tab) 
Reddit (opens in new tab) 
Logan Webb took the high road. 
Kind of what leaders do, at least eventually. 
The Giants’ best pitcher of the past six years had a regrettable moment Wednesday night to cap a regrettable performance Wednesday afternoon, and social media, sports talk shows, and aggregators followed up with a vengeance. 
“I was just frustrated with the way my day went,” Webb told me at his locker. 
“Frustrated with how the season’s gone. 
Just frustrated with that moment where I thought he could’ve asked me about some things instead of saying what he said.” 
More about the author 
Logan Webb San Francisco Giants Sports Sports 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%John Shea: 2.8%The San Francisco Standard: 2.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 1.7%The San Francisco Standard: 3.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.6%John Shea: 1.1%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic3.6%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 1.8%The San Francisco Standard: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 1.5%The San Francisco Standard: 6.8%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.5%The San Francisco Standard: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.5%The San Francisco Standard: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 7.9%The San Francisco Standard: 2.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 23.6%John Shea: 4.2%The San Francisco Standard: 7.2%Negativity Bias23.6%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.4%The San Francisco Standard: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 2.7%John Shea: 2.9%The San Francisco Standard: 3.9%Halo Effect2.7%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 15.9%John Shea: 1.0%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Recency Bias15.9%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.5%The San Francisco Standard: 3.3%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 9.5%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%False Dilemma9.5%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 15.9%John Shea: 2.4%The San Francisco Standard: 5.1%Hasty Generalization15.9%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.9%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 4.4%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.5%The San Francisco Standard: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 3.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 15.9%John Shea: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)15.9%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.3%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Unattributed Quote7.3%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 30.0%John Shea: 2.1%The San Francisco Standard: 5.2%Biased Writer Voice30.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Shea: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 21.8%John Shea: 1.5%The San Francisco Standard: 2.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…21.8%

220 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers25%attributed speech165writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Shea • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageLogan Webb • 16 words • 100.0% coverageLogan Webb • 6 words • 0.0% coverageLogan Webb • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageLogan Webb • 7 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Logan Webb

74%flagged-word coverage
50 attributed words91% of attributed speech69% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Biased Writer Voice-40.0 ptsWriter: 40.0%Logan Webb: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+32.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Logan Webb: 32.0%32.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -29.1 ptsWriter: 29.1%Logan Webb: 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.