Pedestrian killed in suspected DUI crash near Las Vegas Strip 3%

By Caitlin Lilly2%

7/22/2026, 12:42:46 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 4 faulty reasoning types, including Begging the Question, Appeal to Authority, and Unattributed Quote, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 26.7% saturation with 20 hits. Analysis detected 64 faulty-reasoning hits from 75 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 14.2% and a BS Rank of 3% (19,987 of 20,472 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 97.60% of the article peer group.

A pedestrian was killed in a suspected DUI crash early Wednesday morning near the Las Vegas Strip, according to police. 
The Metropolitan Police Department said the crash occurred at about 3:17 a.m. at Sammy Davis Jr. and Resorts World drives. 
The pedestrian was transported to a local hospital, where they were pronounced dead. 
“Officers on scene have a driver detained for impairment investigation,” police stated. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 4.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 3.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 2.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 26.7%Caitlin Lilly: 8.9%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 4.9%Framing Effect26.7%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 2.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 9.2%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 3.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 16.0%Caitlin Lilly: 5.3%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 5.0%Appeal to Authority16.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 3.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 6.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 26.7%Caitlin Lilly: 8.9%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.8%Begging the Question26.7%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 16.0%Caitlin Lilly: 5.3%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.6%Unattributed Quote16.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 2.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Lilly: 0.0%Las Vegas Review-Journal: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

75 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker16%attributed speech63writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageMetropolitan Police Department • 12 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
12 attributed words100% of attributed speech32% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Metropolitan Police Department: 100.0%100.0%

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.