BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Indoctrination, and Halo Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 39.7% saturation with 31 hits. Analysis detected 107 faulty-reasoning hits from 78 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 66.3% and a BS Rank of 75% (5,668 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 74.10% of the article peer group.

From rescuing a porta-potty to removing 7 million pounds of trash, learn how Mr. 
Trash Wheel became a Baltimore icon. 
“We found a pair of Balenciaga sneakers valued at about $1,000. 
You're not going to clean those up! 
Most famously, we got a live python snake," said Adam Lindquist, who helped bring Mr. 
Trash Wheel to life. 
Subscribe to continue reading this article. 
Already subscribed? 
To log in, click here. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 4.5%Baltimore Sun: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 8.3%Baltimore Sun: 3.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 2.2%Baltimore Sun: 4.1%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 3.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 5.2%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 16.7%Jonathan M. Pitts: 8.3%Baltimore Sun: 3.4%Halo Effect16.7%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 2.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 3.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 9.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 2.2%Baltimore Sun: 2.9%Appeal to Emotion9.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 1.9%Baltimore Sun: 0.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 18.9%Baltimore Sun: 2.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.3%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 23.1%Jonathan M. Pitts: 5.8%Baltimore Sun: 1.2%Unattributed Quote23.1%This article: 14.1%Jonathan M. Pitts: 9.3%Baltimore Sun: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection14.1%This article: 39.7%Jonathan M. Pitts: 20.5%Baltimore Sun: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice39.7%This article: 17.9%Jonathan M. Pitts: 4.5%Baltimore Sun: 3.2%Indoctrination17.9%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan M. Pitts: 0.0%Baltimore Sun: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 16.7%Jonathan M. Pitts: 14.4%Baltimore Sun: 4.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…16.7%

78 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker19%attributed speech63writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageAdam Lindquist • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Adam Lindquist

0%flagged-word coverage
15 attributed words100% of attributed speech98% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Biased Writer Voice-49.2 ptsWriter: 49.2%Adam Lindquist: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-28.6 ptsWriter: 28.6%Adam Lindquist: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-22.2 ptsWriter: 22.2%Adam Lindquist: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -20.6 ptsWriter: 20.6%Adam Lindquist: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-17.5 ptsWriter: 17.5%Adam Lindquist: 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.