STLPR0%

Memorial Day tradition: Scouts place flags at Jefferson Barracks National Cemetery 58%

By Charlotte Keene0%

5/24/2026, 5:48:26 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 14 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Availability Heuristic, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 34.2% saturation with 78 hits. Analysis detected 389 faulty-reasoning hits from 228 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.8% and a BS Rank of 58% (9,215 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.90% of the article peer group.

In what began as a humble effort 77 years ago by St. 
Louis Troop 723, a now national Scouting America tradition saw more than a thousand scouts, relatives and other supporters gather Sunday to honor veterans and their loved ones by placing flags at gravestones in Jefferson Barracks National Cemetery. 
Cub Scout Den Leader Rebecca Belmear inspired a family custom after following in her brother's footsteps. 
Now all three of her three children are current scouts. 
"To have it become something that the entire family can participate in is amazing," Belmear said. 
"The organization itself is built so much on the idea of doing good for the community and being part of the community, but this activity in particular is a really nice symbol of what we can do when we all work together." 
The scouts placed flags at each of the more than 200,000 headstones ahead of Memorial Day, when many people come to visit loved ones. 
"The scouts are here to help," said event organizer Joe Crabtree, who is an Army veteran. 
Through rain or shine the scouts have shown up year after year, he said. 
The organization's values are the beating heart for traditions like these that "advocate for the honor and service with everybody." 
The Scouts will return Tuesday to remove the flags. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 16.7%Charlotte Keene: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.7%Availability Heuristic16.7%This article: 4.4%Charlotte Keene: 1.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic4.4%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 32.0%Charlotte Keene: 4.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.3%Framing Effect32.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 1.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.3%Charlotte Keene: 2.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 4.8%Optimism Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 10.5%Charlotte Keene: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.1%Negativity Bias10.5%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error7.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 5.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 34.2%Charlotte Keene: 6.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Halo Effect34.2%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.1%Charlotte Keene: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Recency Bias6.1%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.6%Appeal to Authority7.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 8.8%Charlotte Keene: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Circular Reasoning8.8%This article: 6.1%Charlotte Keene: 1.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.7%Hasty Generalization6.1%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 18.4%Charlotte Keene: 15.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion18.4%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 4.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 1.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 7.0%Charlotte Keene: 2.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection7.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 2.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 7.0%Charlotte Keene: 2.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Indoctrination7.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charlotte Keene: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

228 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers46%attributed speech124writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageRebecca Belmear • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageRebecca Belmear • 16 words • 100.0% coverageRebecca Belmear • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJoe Crabtree • 16 words • 100.0% coverageJoe Crabtree • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Rebecca Belmear

100%flagged-word coverage
74 attributed words71% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Indoctrination+21.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Rebecca Belmear: 21.6%21.6%

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.