The Metro: Every tribe in Michigan opposes this pipeline. Michigan approved it anyway ⁠44%

By Robyn Vincent⁠32%

7/22/2026, 1:03:33 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 32.2% saturation with 130 hits. Analysis detected 861 faulty-reasoning hits from 404 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 46.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (12,460 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 56.90% of the article peer group.

Enbridge is a step closer to building a new oil tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac for its Line 5 after the state of Michigan approved permits for the project last week . 
Line 5 runs 645 miles from Superior, Wisconsin, to Sarnia, Ontario, carrying crude and natural gas liquids. 
Most of it transits Michigan to reach Canada. 
Enbridge and the state say a concrete tunnel would get the 73-year-old pipeline out of open water, where a rupture could spill into the Straits of Mackinac. 
But the permit concedes some of what is at stake . 
Historic and cultural resources will likely be destroyed — the remains of tribal ancestors among them. 
Enbridge has to file a plan to lessen the damage. 
Environmental activists and Michigan tribal communities say that is not enough. 
The Straits are where the Bay Mills Indian creation story begins . 
They are also among the most productive fishing grounds for tribes exercising rights under an 1836 treaty. 
Whitney Gravelle is a federal Indian law attorney and president of the Bay Mills Indian Community, which has vowed to fight back. 
She joined Robyn Vincent on The Metro to discuss why she calls the state’s decision a betrayal. 
Enbridge is a financial supporter of WDET. 
Our newsroom observes a clear boundary between funders and editorial content, and we do not serve the agendas of those who support us. 
Hear the full conversation using the media player above. 
Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on-demand. 
Never miss an episode — subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts , Spotify , YouTube , or NPR , or wherever you get your podcasts. 
Have thoughts? 
Email the show at metro@wdet.org. 
Support the podcasts you love. 
One-of-a-kind podcasts from WDET bring you engaging conversations, news you need to know and stories you love to hear. 
Keep the conversations coming. 
Please make a gift today . 
More stories from The Metro 
The Metro: Air quality in Detroit is better. 
A local physician is still concerned 
The Metro: ‘Divining Freedom’ represents Detroit not only as a city, but as an idea 
The Metro: Is local food safer? 
A Detroit farmer weighs in 
The post The Metro: Every tribe in Michigan opposes this pipeline. 
Michigan approved it anyway appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.7%Robyn Vincent: 1.2%WDET: 1.7%Confirmation Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Robyn Vincent: 1.2%WDET: 2.3%Availability Heuristic2.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 1.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 30.0%Robyn Vincent: 8.6%WDET: 4.7%Framing Effect30.0%This article: 2.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.5%WDET: 0.9%Loss Aversion2.7%This article: 6.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.8%WDET: 0.3%Status Quo Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.7%Robyn Vincent: 1.1%WDET: 3.5%Optimism Bias4.7%This article: 4.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.5%WDET: 0.9%Pessimism Bias4.0%This article: 32.2%Robyn Vincent: 9.3%WDET: 3.4%Negativity Bias32.2%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 1.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.2%WDET: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error1.7%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.9%WDET: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Robyn Vincent: 1.4%WDET: 1.2%In-Group Bias10.4%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.5%WDET: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.5%WDET: 5.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.3%WDET: 0.9%Recency Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.2%WDET: 0.2%Ad Hominem1.7%This article: 2.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.3%WDET: 0.1%Straw Man2.7%This article: 9.9%Robyn Vincent: 1.9%WDET: 3.3%Appeal to Authority9.9%This article: 1.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.2%WDET: 1.0%False Dilemma1.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.7%Robyn Vincent: 1.9%WDET: 3.4%Hasty Generalization7.7%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.7%WDET: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.8%Robyn Vincent: 2.6%WDET: 4.6%Appeal to Emotion15.8%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.9%WDET: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 10.6%Robyn Vincent: 1.2%WDET: 0.4%Burden of Proof10.6%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 1.2%WDET: 1.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.3%WDET: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.7%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 1.7%Robyn Vincent: 0.2%WDET: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy1.7%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 2.1%WDET: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 6.9%Robyn Vincent: 1.6%WDET: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection6.9%This article: 28.2%Robyn Vincent: 8.4%WDET: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice28.2%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.3%WDET: 2.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.3%WDET: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robyn Vincent: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 24.3%Robyn Vincent: 17.2%WDET: 7.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…24.3%

404 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers11%attributed speech359writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageBay Mills Indian Community • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWDET • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

WDET

100%flagged-word coverage
23 attributed words51% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+74.7 ptsWriter: 25.3%WDET: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -27.3 ptsWriter: 27.3%WDET: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-7.8 ptsWriter: 7.8%WDET: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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