BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Anecdotal, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 31.9% saturation with 206 hits. Analysis detected 1,090 faulty-reasoning hits from 645 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 55.3% and a BS Rank of 59% (8,603 of 20,516 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 58.10% of the article peer group.

NEW YORK (AP)  The seeming incongruity of President Donald Trump’s expected attendance at an event that honors the press has brought renewed scrutiny to the annual White House Correspondents’ Association dinner, a fixture on Washington’s spring social calendar that is scheduled for this weekend. 
Between berating individual reporters, fighting organizations like The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Associated Press in court and restricting press access to the Pentagon, the administration’s animus toward journalists has been a fixture of Trump’s second term. 
It’s another layer of complexity for the so-called “nerd prom,” given the name for the sight of reporters in tuxes. 
Some people are already squeaming about journalists toasting and laughing with people they regularly cover. 
“This is sort of a critical moment for these dinners and it will be interesting to see what happens going forward,” said Lisa Stark, a former ABC News reporter. 
She and longtime colleague Ian Cameron have circulated a petition urging journalists who attend Saturday to “speak forcefully” in defense of the press with Trump in attendance. 
Dan Rather and former ABC White House reporter Sam Donaldson are among more than 350 former journalists to sign. 
Reporters have talked about a visible protest like lapel pins touting the First Amendment. 
“This man mocks you, sues you, and targets you for prosecution,” former AP White House reporter Ron Fournier wrote on Substack. 
He detailed a list on Trump’s actions against the press, finishing with: “and you’re having dinner with him?” 
The top editor at HuffPost  a news website clearly hostile to Trump  said its journalists wouldn’t attend Saturday as a protest. 
Meanwhile, CBS owners Paramount are reportedly hosting a dinner to honor Trump Thursday at the Institute of Peace, which was renamed for Trump last year. 
Paramount is awaiting government approval of its deal to buy Warner Bros. 
Discovery. 
The president, if he chooses to stay at the correspondents dinner Saturday, will also face some uncomfortable moments as the WHCA gives awards to journalists he has criticized, like CNN’s Kaitlan Collins. 
The Wall Street Journal is being honored for its story about Trump’s birthday message to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein  for which the president sued the newspaper. 
The AP, which is battling Trump in court over access, is also being honored and will attend. 
Debate over the appearance of partying with the president and his staff isn’t new. 
The New York Times stopped attending the event in 2011 for that reason. 
The Atlantic magazine wrote about the “slow, awkward death” of the correspondents dinner in 2018. 
Correspondents should acknowledge that “a red-carpet schmoozefest with the powerful sources they cover was never a good idea,” McBride wrote. 
News organizations will also be watched this weekend for administration officials sitting at their tables as guests, such as CBS News reportedly inviting Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. 
Many journalists who have attended, however, said the opportunity to have personal interactions with people they cover can help them later in their jobs. 
Gilman has brought ambassadors from Mexico as guests— an important contact for a reporter at a Texas newspaper. 
NPR journalist Eric Deggans wrote on Substack that he got an interview with media mogul Byron Allen after making a connection at the WHCA dinner. 
“Even if you’re not sitting with an administration official, you have the opportunity to walk up to someone, say hi, break the ice and give them a business card,” Gilman said. 
“It puts a face to the name, so maybe they’ll return your call the next time.” 
David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. 
Follow him at http://twitter.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social. 
This story has been corrected to reflect that Todd Gillman is a former Washington bureau chief for the Dallas Morning News, not a former White House bureau chief. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.0%David Bauder: 2.4%AP News: 2.0%Confirmation Bias7.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 2.2%AP News: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.2%David Bauder: 4.4%AP News: 2.7%Availability Heuristic2.2%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.9%AP News: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 2.0%David Bauder: 0.8%AP News: 0.4%Hindsight Bias2.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.8%AP News: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 18.6%David Bauder: 19.8%AP News: 8.0%Framing Effect18.6%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 8.8%AP News: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 1.5%AP News: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%David Bauder: 0.2%AP News: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect2.0%This article: 13.0%David Bauder: 2.1%AP News: 2.2%Optimism Bias13.0%This article: 5.0%David Bauder: 2.3%AP News: 2.0%Pessimism Bias5.0%This article: 31.9%David Bauder: 20.5%AP News: 9.6%Negativity Bias31.9%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 1.9%AP News: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.2%AP News: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 2.1%AP News: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 2.5%David Bauder: 2.4%AP News: 1.4%Halo Effect2.5%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.2%David Bauder: 2.0%AP News: 1.3%Recency Bias2.2%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.5%AP News: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%David Bauder: 1.0%AP News: 0.8%Ad Hominem3.3%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 3.3%AP News: 3.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.6%AP News: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 1.9%AP News: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.2%David Bauder: 4.0%AP News: 2.5%Hasty Generalization6.2%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.2%David Bauder: 3.4%AP News: 0.3%Bandwagon4.2%This article: 14.0%David Bauder: 8.4%AP News: 4.7%Appeal to Emotion14.0%This article: 2.8%David Bauder: 2.6%AP News: 0.6%Begging the Question2.8%This article: 2.5%David Bauder: 3.2%AP News: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.5%This article: 2.8%David Bauder: 0.3%AP News: 0.1%Tu Quoque2.8%This article: 4.2%David Bauder: 0.6%AP News: 0.4%Burden of Proof4.2%This article: 4.8%David Bauder: 0.5%AP News: 0.1%Appeal to Nature4.8%This article: 2.8%David Bauder: 0.3%AP News: 0.2%Composition/Division2.8%This article: 14.9%David Bauder: 3.9%AP News: 1.2%Anecdotal14.9%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.1%David Bauder: 0.3%AP News: 0.1%Middle Ground3.1%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.5%AP News: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.5%David Bauder: 0.8%AP News: 2.0%Unattributed Quote4.5%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 1.0%AP News: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 9.1%David Bauder: 3.3%AP News: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice9.1%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.7%AP News: 0.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 3.6%David Bauder: 0.4%AP News: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Bauder: 0.0%AP News: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

645 words analyzed.

Speakers

9speakers43%attributed speech365writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageLisa Stark • 29 words • 100.0% coverageLisa Stark • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageRon Fournier • 21 words • 0.0% coverageRon Fournier • 18 words • 0.0% coverageHuffPost • 23 words • 100.0% coverageCBS owners Paramount • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWall Street Journal • 28 words • 0.0% coverageAP • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMcBride • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageEric Deggans • 25 words • 0.0% coverageGilman • 31 words • 0.0% coverageGilman • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

HuffPost

100%flagged-word coverage
23 attributed words8.2% of attributed speech76% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Politically Left Leaning B+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%HuffPost: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-16.2 ptsWriter: 16.2%HuffPost: 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.