Bronx man arrested for stabbing, slashing 3 men in Times Square 8%

By Emma Seiwell50%

7/22/2026, 4:17:13 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Availability Heuristic, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 45.1% saturation with 65 hits. Analysis detected 172 faulty-reasoning hits from 144 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 24.8% and a BS Rank of 8% (20,151 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 92.10% of the article peer group.

A Bronx man was arrested for stabbing one man and slashing two others in Times Square, cops said Wednesday. 
Breshan Bennett, 24, was charged with assault, menacing, and criminal possession of a weapon for the Tuesday night clash on W. 50th St. near Seventh Ave., cops said. 
Bennett was bickering with the men across the street from an Applebee’s when he pulled a knife about 10:35 p.m., cops said. 
He allegedly stabbed a 24-year-old man in the torso and slashed him in the leg, slashed a 26-year-old man on both his hands and one leg, and slashed a third unidentified man in the leg. 
The wounded men were taken by medics to Bellevue Hospital in stable condition. 
It’s not clear what sparked the argument. 
Bennett’s arraignment in Manhattan Criminal Court was pending Wednesday. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.2%Emma Seiwell: 2.4%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Confirmation Bias13.2%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 15.3%Emma Seiwell: 3.3%newyorkdailynews: 3.4%Availability Heuristic15.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 7.6%Emma Seiwell: 5.8%newyorkdailynews: 6.1%Framing Effect7.6%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.5%newyorkdailynews: 2.8%Optimism Bias9.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.6%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 45.1%Emma Seiwell: 11.4%newyorkdailynews: 9.8%Negativity Bias45.1%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.8%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 4.0%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 4.9%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 2.4%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 3.1%newyorkdailynews: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 10.0%newyorkdailynews: 7.4%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.4%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 2.0%newyorkdailynews: 3.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.6%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.2%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 24.3%Emma Seiwell: 2.5%newyorkdailynews: 2.6%Anecdotal24.3%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.2%newyorkdailynews: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 1.9%newyorkdailynews: 2.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 3.9%newyorkdailynews: 6.7%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.9%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emma Seiwell: 0.3%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

144 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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