Woody Guthrie And The Ghost Of Tom Joad Today ⁠83%

By Heather⁠84%

8/2/2026, 2:50:41 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Red Herring, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 67 hits. Analysis detected 375 faulty-reasoning hits from 67 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 68.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠83% (4,794 of 27,714 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.70% of the article peer group.

Narrated by Rosanne Cash and featuring music from Bruce Springsteen, this timely film connects the paths of two American icons—songwriter Woody Guthrie (who penned "This Land is Your Land") and novelist John Steinbeck (who wrote "The Grapes of Wrath")—as they forged a bond in a campaign to ease the suffering of migrants in California, and their legacy today. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Heather: 6.5%Crooks and Liars: 7.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.9%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 1.3%Crooks and Liars: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 100.0%Heather: 18.3%Crooks and Liars: 7.3%Framing Effect100.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 2.1%Crooks and Liars: 1.1%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 4.4%Crooks and Liars: 2.0%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 86.6%Heather: 19.6%Crooks and Liars: 17.5%Negativity Bias86.6%This article: 0.0%Heather: 1.8%Crooks and Liars: 3.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 1.2%Crooks and Liars: 2.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 3.6%Crooks and Liars: 0.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 2.2%Crooks and Liars: 1.5%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 13.4%Heather: 1.9%Crooks and Liars: 0.5%Primacy Effect13.4%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 10.7%Crooks and Liars: 10.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 86.6%Heather: 5.4%Crooks and Liars: 3.0%Appeal to Authority86.6%This article: 0.0%Heather: 4.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 2.2%Crooks and Liars: 0.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.3%Crooks and Liars: 10.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 86.6%Heather: 2.7%Crooks and Liars: 1.1%Red Herring86.6%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 86.6%Heather: 7.6%Crooks and Liars: 7.7%Appeal to Emotion86.6%This article: 0.0%Heather: 4.2%Crooks and Liars: 1.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 1.4%Crooks and Liars: 1.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 3.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.3%Crooks and Liars: 1.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.6%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 3.3%Crooks and Liars: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.9%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 2.7%Crooks and Liars: 2.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 1.2%Crooks and Liars: 1.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 13.4%Heather: 19.9%Crooks and Liars: 23.7%Biased Writer Voice13.4%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 4.0%Crooks and Liars: 9.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Heather: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 86.6%Heather: 2.7%Crooks and Liars: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…86.6%

67 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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