Man ⁠11%

By Sun-Times Wire⁠5%

7/13/2026, 12:44:53 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Biased Writer Voice, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 44.9% saturation with 71 hits. Analysis detected 315 faulty-reasoning hits from 158 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (19,580 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 89.50% of the article peer group.

Deanta Ray, 20, was shot on June 20 in the 700 block of South Independence Boulevard and Ray died on June 6, officials said. 
Sun-Times file photo 
A 20-year-old man who was shot in June in the Garfield Park neighborhood died last week, officials said. 
Deanta Ray, who was shot June 20 in the 700 block of South Independence Boulevard died on July 6 at 3:52 p.m., according to the Cook County medical examiner’s office. 
Ray’s death was caused by a gunshot wound to the head and it was ruled a homicide, according to the medical examiner’s office. 
No arrests have been announced and Area 4 detectives are investigating. 
Chicago Public Media 
South Chicago weekend shooting leaves man, 19, dead 
3 shot on Near West Side 
Man critically wounded in Chicago Lawn shooting 
Boy, 16, injured in Garfield Ridge shooting 
Officer fires at vehicle during large overnight gathering in Grant Park 
Boy hospitalized after shooting in Austin 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.4%Chicago Sun-Times: 3.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 15.2%Sun-Times Wire: 1.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.6%Anchoring Bias15.2%This article: 11.4%Sun-Times Wire: 2.7%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.9%Availability Heuristic11.4%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 9.5%Sun-Times Wire: 2.9%Chicago Sun-Times: 5.3%Framing Effect9.5%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 7.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.3%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.7%Status Quo Bias7.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.3%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 12.0%Sun-Times Wire: 12.5%Chicago Sun-Times: 7.9%Negativity Bias12.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.4%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.4%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.9%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 33.5%Sun-Times Wire: 4.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.8%Appeal to Authority33.5%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.6%Chicago Sun-Times: 4.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.4%Sun-Times Wire: 0.5%Chicago Sun-Times: 5.5%Appeal to Emotion4.4%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 1.3%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.3%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 17.1%Sun-Times Wire: 0.9%Chicago Sun-Times: 3.1%Anecdotal17.1%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 22.2%Sun-Times Wire: 1.9%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)22.2%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 44.9%Sun-Times Wire: 6.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.8%Unattributed Quote44.9%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 1.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 22.2%Sun-Times Wire: 1.9%Chicago Sun-Times: 4.3%Biased Writer Voice22.2%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.6%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S
0.0%

158 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers37%attributed speech99writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice ‱ 1 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 24 words ‱ 100.0% coverageSun-Times ‱ 3 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 18 words ‱ 100.0% coverageCook County medical examiner’s office ‱ 30 words ‱ 100.0% coveragemedical examiner’s office ‱ 23 words ‱ 100.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 11 words ‱ 100.0% coverageChicago Public Media ‱ 3 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 8 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 6 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 7 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 7 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 11 words ‱ 0.0% coverageWriter's voice ‱ 6 words ‱ 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
30 attributed words51% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+81.8 ptsWriter: 18.2%Cook County medical examiner’s office: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-35.4 ptsWriter: 35.4%Cook County medical examiner’s office: 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.