Kansas allows bars to run nearly 24/7 during World Cup, but most of Johnson County won't join 8%

By Kate Mays0%

5/24/2026, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Pessimism Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 19.1% saturation with 106 hits. Analysis detected 703 faulty-reasoning hits from 555 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 25% and a BS Rank of 8% (18,932 of 20,516 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 92.30% of the article peer group.

Kansas lawmakers gave cities the option to allow almost 24/7 alcohol sales during the World Cup. 
But finding a Johnson County bar planning to take advantage of it may prove difficult. 
Olathe became just the second city to opt in after the Olathe City Council approved the measure 7-0 on Tuesday. 
Even so, 10 Olathe late-night spots that the Post called this week all said they will keep their normal hours this summer. 
For instance, neither location of Austin’s Bar and Grill plans to extend its hours. 
“I don’t know how much of a soccer crowd we have here,” said Addison Ramsey, a manager at the Lone Elm location. 
“I know that the World Cup itself is kind of a big thing. 
I just don’t know how many people genuinely would be in that late.” 
In March, Kansas passed a law allowing cities and counties to temporarily permit businesses to sell alcohol from 6 a.m. to 5 a.m. during the tournament. 
The law is in effect from May 15 to July 25. 
Kansas City will host six World Cup matches in June and July at Arrowhead Stadium. 
According to a conference committee brief, proponents of Kansas’ bill said it would help the state “meet the unique international moment,” make Kansas more economically competitive with Missouri and increase revenues for Kansas businesses. 
Local governments are preparing for an influx of international visitors in other ways, though there is growing public skepticism that the officially cited estimate of 650,000 metrowide guests will come to pass. 
Earlier this month, Johnson County approved a $6.8 million increase to its transportation budget for World Cup-related services, including new bus routes and airport transportation. 
In Johnson County, some hotels also say they are not yet fully booked for the weeks of the World Cup and are even lagging behind where bookings would normally be for that time of the summer. 
Besides Olathe, Merriam is the only other Johnson County city so far to approve the expanded alcohol sale hours. 
Leawood, Lenexa, Shawnee and Gardner all voted against expanding hours. 
Prairie Village and Overland Park haven’t voted on the measure, and neither city currently has it listed on an upcoming agenda. 
At a May 4 meeting, Gardner City Council President Mark Baldwin said he didn’t see how passing the ordinance would benefit his southern Johnson County community. 
“We’re not a top bar-hopping location,” Baldwin said. 
“This is five extra weeks of people doing who knows what in the wee hours, drunk.” 
In contrast, Olathe city staff recommended passing the ordinance “based on feedback from Olathe businesses that some would expand their hours of operation if the allowable hours were expanded.” 
But the Post reached out to nearly a dozen bars and restaurants in Olathe. 
None of them said they planned to extend their hours. 
Several businesses, like Austin’s, doubted they would see much interest from their patrons for longer hours. 
That echoes Jake Chappelow, co-owner and CEO of Burg & Barrel, which has locations in Leawood, Lenexa and Overland Park. 
He said he wouldn’t have opted in if the measure had passed where his restaurants are located. 
“Staffing would be hard to maintain,” he said. 
This story was originally published by the Johnson County Post. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.2%Kate Mays: 2.4%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 5.9%Kate Mays: 3.3%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic5.9%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Kate Mays: 10.2%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect2.9%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.1%Kate Mays: 1.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.1%Kate Mays: 8.6%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias6.1%This article: 13.0%Kate Mays: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias13.0%This article: 19.1%Kate Mays: 8.0%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias19.1%This article: 4.5%Kate Mays: 2.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 1.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Kate Mays: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect3.6%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.5%Kate Mays: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias6.5%This article: 3.4%Kate Mays: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect3.4%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.4%Kate Mays: 2.9%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority11.4%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.3%Kate Mays: 5.1%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization8.3%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.9%Kate Mays: 4.6%Columbia Missourian: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion2.9%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 3.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 14.8%Kate Mays: 3.3%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal14.8%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.3%Kate Mays: 1.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.3%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.6%Kate Mays: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote8.6%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.1%Kate Mays: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice3.1%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kate Mays: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

555 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers27%attributed speech403writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageAddison Ramsey • 22 words • 100.0% coverageAddison Ramsey • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAddison Ramsey • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageMark Baldwin • 26 words • 100.0% coverageMark Baldwin • 8 words • 0.0% coverageMark Baldwin • 16 words • 0.0% coverageOlathe city staff • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageJake Chappelow • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJake Chappelow • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Mark Baldwin

100%flagged-word coverage
50 attributed words33% of attributed speech64% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Unattributed Quote+52.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Mark Baldwin: 52.0%52.0%Biased Writer Voice-4.2 ptsWriter: 4.2%Mark Baldwin: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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