Gothamist76%

Tracking the legend of the New York City Nutcracker 34%

By Elizabeth Shwe0%

6/11/2026, 5:34:49 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Hasty Generalization, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 22.3% saturation with 127 hits. Analysis detected 779 faulty-reasoning hits from 569 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 42.2% and a BS Rank of 34% (14,009 of 21,172 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 66.20% of the article peer group.

The column first appeared in Looped In NYC, a newsletter to help New Yorkers make sense of the city. 
Sign up to get the email which also features event listings, NYC news to know and a reader photos. 
You know it’s almost summer when you start seeing vendors hauling coolers through New York City’s parks and beaches, selling brightly colored, ice cold drinks. 
New Yorkers call them “nutcrackers,” but have you ever wondered why? 
And what distinguishes a nutcracker from any other fruity cocktail? 
Led Black, the founder of the Uptown Collective news outlet, made a documentary about nutcrackers in 2012. 
He describes them as “underground street cocktails” that carry a certain mystique because they’re technically illicit. 
“Every New Yorker has that ‘what’s a nutcracker’ moment,” Black told me. 
“Once you try it, you’re like, I got hammered for like ten bucks or five bucks and it wasn't completely yucky.” 
But the nutcrackers found in the city’s parks and beaches today stray far from Flor de Mayo’s original because they use completely different liquor bases and fruit mixers. 
The name is what keeps it viable and “street official,” Black said. 
It allows anyone with a strong entrepreneurial spirit to put their own twist on the drink and start a hustle, Black said. 
To Black, the nutcracker’s evolution is “a story of immigrants' innovation  taking a bad situation and finding a way to make a living and rise above the situation that you're currently in.” 
That hustle still exists among vendors like Jerome Guthrie, who was selling various different drinks in an ice cooler at a cookout at Marcus Garvey Park in Harlem. 
He said nutcrackers, which he started selling in 2013 as a hustle, are his staple drinks. 
But now his business  Head Bangaz  has turned into one of his main sources of income. 
His motto is “if it’s whack, you get your money back, and that’s a fact,” which he says helps him stand out from other nutcracker sellers. 
To Guthrie, a nutcracker is like a tropical drink that “packs a punch” with a light liquor base. 
He uses different Minute Maid juices, fruit cocktails and vodka. 
Guthrie told me he’s never had Flor de Mayo’s original nutcracker, but that he’d love to try it. 
On hot summer days, Guthrie told me he’s guaranteed to sell out, especially because he’s willing to deliver his drinks to all five boroughs. 
He told me he can make around $2,000 or more a month and hopes to start selling them wholesale one day. 
Despite living in New York City for most of my 20s, this was my first time trying a nutcracker. 
Jose’s tasted exactly how he described it, like cherry cough syrup, but not in a bad way, and I could barely taste the alcohol. 
Jerome's was refreshing, fruity and strong as well  kind of like an upgraded version of a cocktail you make for yourself at a party. 
And as someone who loves sweets, it was the perfect drink for a hot day. 
Both were definitely strong and hit after a few sips. 
Whether you drink them or not, nutcrackers are the New York City staple drink because they only exist here, Guthrie said. 
Black agreed. 
New York City is constantly innovating and adapting to changes, and the nutcracker is an example of that, he said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.2%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.6%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias4.2%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%Elizabeth Shwe: 3.3%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic2.1%This article: 3.5%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.3%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic3.5%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.3%Gothamist: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias4.2%This article: 14.2%Elizabeth Shwe: 5.7%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect14.2%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.5%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.9%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.5%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 10.7%Elizabeth Shwe: 2.4%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias10.7%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.5%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 4.2%Gothamist: 8.5%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Elizabeth Shwe: 2.1%Gothamist: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias10.4%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.9%Gothamist: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.2%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.0%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect10.4%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.3%Gothamist: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.5%Gothamist: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 1.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.3%Elizabeth Shwe: 2.3%Gothamist: 4.4%Appeal to Authority3.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.0%Gothamist: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 2.1%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.1%Circular Reasoning2.1%This article: 13.9%Elizabeth Shwe: 4.1%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization13.9%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.3%Elizabeth Shwe: 3.6%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion6.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 12.7%Elizabeth Shwe: 2.2%Gothamist: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.7%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 22.3%Elizabeth Shwe: 2.1%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal22.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.3%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.5%Gothamist: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.5%Gothamist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.7%Gothamist: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 2.7%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 4.0%Gothamist: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Shwe: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Elizabeth Shwe: 2.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.3%

569 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers51%attributed speech279writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageLed Black • 16 words • 0.0% coverageLed Black • 12 words • 0.0% coverageLed Black • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageLed Black • 12 words • 0.0% coverageLed Black • 22 words • 0.0% coverageLed Black • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 26 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 18 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 18 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJerome Guthrie • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageLed Black • 20 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jerome Guthrie

83%flagged-word coverage
154 attributed words53% of attributed speech80% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -6.8 ptsWriter: 6.8%Jerome Guthrie: 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.