VOSD Podcast: Plug-in Blues 19%

By Matt Skraby0%

7/11/2026, 8:18:45 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 19.4% saturation with 51 hits. Analysis detected 333 faulty-reasoning hits from 263 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 33.7% and a BS Rank of 19% (17,878 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 81.70% of the article peer group.

People outside their balconies on Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020, in San Diego. 
(AP Photo/Ashley Landis) 
Rooftop solar is all the rage, but what if you don’t own the space above your home? 
Environment reporter MacKenzie Elmer joins the show this week to discuss SB 868 , a bill that would make it easier to for renters and condo owners to use plug-in solar panels. 
Yes, but: SDG&E isn’t totally fired up about the legislation. 
The company is raising concerns about worker safety but supporters of “balcony solar” say it’s safe. 
Here’s Elmer explaining what went down at a recent meeting. 
( Editor’s note: Edited for length and clarity. 
) 
Elmer (38:30): “The utility company, SDG&E  they sent a representative to a committee hearing in the Assembly. 
She sat up there and she said, ‘I have multiple incidents where  our workers found that solar had been sending power back through the grid when we thought that the line was actually down.’ 
The utility’s lines need to be down, no electricity can be flowing through them in order for it to be safe for the workers to work on the line. 
So that’s the concern.” 
Also on the show: Education reporter Jacob McWhinney breaks down a proposed $3.5 billion general obligation bond for the 2026 ballot . 
This would be the district’s fifth bond in 18 years. 
He explains the gutsy proposal possibly coming to a ballot near you. 
Listen: Apple | Spotify | PodLink 
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. 
Learn how your comment data is processed. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 3.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.3%Matt Skraby: 7.6%Voice of San Diego: 2.6%Availability Heuristic13.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 14.8%Matt Skraby: 9.0%Voice of San Diego: 6.1%Framing Effect14.8%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.6%Matt Skraby: 1.1%Voice of San Diego: 3.0%Optimism Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.9%Matt Skraby: 2.5%Voice of San Diego: 9.1%Negativity Bias9.9%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 1.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 7.6%Matt Skraby: 1.9%Voice of San Diego: 0.4%Primacy Effect7.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 3.0%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 1.5%Voice of San Diego: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 4.2%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 1.6%Voice of San Diego: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 4.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 1.5%Matt Skraby: 0.4%Voice of San Diego: 0.6%Begging the Question1.5%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 13.3%Matt Skraby: 6.7%Voice of San Diego: 2.3%Anecdotal13.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 13.7%Matt Skraby: 3.4%Voice of San Diego: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)13.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.5%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 19.4%Matt Skraby: 4.8%Voice of San Diego: 1.6%Unattributed Quote19.4%This article: 6.8%Matt Skraby: 5.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection6.8%This article: 14.8%Matt Skraby: 6.2%Voice of San Diego: 6.8%Biased Writer Voice14.8%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Skraby: 0.0%Voice of San Diego: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Matt Skraby: 2.3%Voice of San Diego: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…6.8%

263 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker33%attributed speech177writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageMacKenzie Elmer • 18 words • 100.0% coverageMacKenzie Elmer • 35 words • 100.0% coverageMacKenzie Elmer • 29 words • 0.0% coverageMacKenzie Elmer • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

MacKenzie Elmer

66%flagged-word coverage
86 attributed words100% of attributed speech64% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Unattributed Quote+31.7 ptsWriter: 9.0%MacKenzie Elmer: 40.7%40.7%Biased Writer Voice-22.0 ptsWriter: 22.0%MacKenzie Elmer: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+20.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%MacKenzie Elmer: 20.9%20.9%Attempt to Sell a Product -10.2 ptsWriter: 10.2%MacKenzie Elmer: 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.