OutKick⁠97%

Taylor Sheridan's New TV Show Puts Up Absurd TV Ratings, Featured Shocking Death ⁠83%

By David Hookstead⁠0%

3/30/2026, 11:55:47 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Optimism Bias, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 51.8% saturation with 191 hits. Analysis detected 918 faulty-reasoning hits from 369 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 74.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠83% (3,628 of 20,366 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.20% of the article peer group.

Taylor Sheridan's new series "The Madison" is a massive success with fans. 
The series with Kurt Russell and Michelle Pfeiffer was shrouded in secrecy ahead of its March 14th premiere on Paramount+. 
Initially, it was believed to be part of the "Yellowstone" universe. 
That turned out to not be true at all. 
Instead, it's a standalone series with the plot described as follows: "Introducing the Clyburns, THE MADISON is a heartfelt study of grief and human connection following a New York City family in the Madison River valley of central Montana." 
"The Madison" puts up monster viewership numbers. 
Now, I was very skeptical that "The Madison" would be a hit with Sheridan's viewers, given the plot description above is nothing like his previous works. 
I did get the opportunity to watch the premiere, and it was evident from the jump that "The Madison" was going to put up numbers. 
My assessment turned out to be correct. 
Paramount+ announced that the show with Russell and Pfeiffer is Taylor Sheridan's most watched season one premiere in the history of his career. 
A staggering eight million people streamed it on Paramount+ in the first 10 days since its premiere. 
The power of Sheridan, even when I had some doubts, proves to be unrivaled. 
*WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW* Now, I have to say that Sheridan really cooked with the script when he killed off Kurt Russell's character in the season premiere. 
You need a plot development that grabs people and refuses to let go. 
Killing off the face of the show in the first episodes is one hell of a twist I don't think most people expected. 
Now, Russell's character being killed off doesn't mean he makes no further appearances. 
Trust me, fans of the "Miracle" star are going to be just fine. 
Pfeiffer and the talented actor both crush it. 
I had my doubts going in, but there's no question that Sheridan, once again, has cooked up a show fans can't get enough of. 
The numbers prove it. 
Are you watching "The Madison"? 
Let me know at David.Hookstead@outkick.com, but no spoilers! 
I still have a lot of episodes to go. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.7%David Hookstead: 9.2%Outkick: 8.8%Confirmation Bias12.7%This article: 7.0%David Hookstead: 2.9%Outkick: 1.9%Anchoring Bias7.0%This article: 10.8%David Hookstead: 5.4%Outkick: 5.3%Availability Heuristic10.8%This article: 7.0%David Hookstead: 2.4%Outkick: 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic7.0%This article: 1.9%David Hookstead: 0.8%Outkick: 1.9%Hindsight Bias1.9%This article: 4.9%David Hookstead: 12.7%Outkick: 6.1%Overconfidence Bias4.9%This article: 7.0%David Hookstead: 17.1%Outkick: 12.5%Framing Effect7.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.6%Outkick: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.0%Outkick: 1.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.0%Outkick: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 16.8%David Hookstead: 9.6%Outkick: 4.4%Optimism Bias16.8%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.6%Outkick: 2.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.8%David Hookstead: 11.4%Outkick: 12.8%Negativity Bias9.8%This article: 5.4%David Hookstead: 6.1%Outkick: 3.2%Self-Serving Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 2.4%Outkick: 3.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.0%Outkick: 0.6%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%David Hookstead: 13.3%Outkick: 5.1%In-Group Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 8.0%Outkick: 2.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%David Hookstead: 10.0%Outkick: 5.2%Halo Effect5.4%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.1%Outkick: 1.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.2%Outkick: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.9%David Hookstead: 1.8%Outkick: 3.4%Recency Bias1.9%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.1%Outkick: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.2%Outkick: 0.4%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 6.0%Outkick: 4.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 5.7%Outkick: 2.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.2%David Hookstead: 6.2%Outkick: 3.6%Appeal to Authority6.2%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 2.4%Outkick: 2.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.2%Outkick: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 1.9%David Hookstead: 0.3%Outkick: 0.3%Circular Reasoning1.9%This article: 10.8%David Hookstead: 12.9%Outkick: 11.5%Hasty Generalization10.8%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.5%Outkick: 1.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 7.9%David Hookstead: 5.9%Outkick: 2.4%Bandwagon7.9%This article: 10.6%David Hookstead: 17.8%Outkick: 10.0%Appeal to Emotion10.6%This article: 3.5%David Hookstead: 2.0%Outkick: 1.7%Begging the Question3.5%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.1%Outkick: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 3.5%David Hookstead: 0.2%Outkick: 0.3%Tu Quoque3.5%This article: 1.1%David Hookstead: 0.8%Outkick: 0.5%Burden of Proof1.1%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.0%Outkick: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.0%Outkick: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 24.9%David Hookstead: 7.1%Outkick: 4.3%Anecdotal24.9%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.6%Outkick: 0.4%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.5%David Hookstead: 1.0%Outkick: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.5%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.1%Outkick: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.0%Outkick: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.4%Outkick: 0.7%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.3%Outkick: 1.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.8%Outkick: 0.7%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 10.6%David Hookstead: 0.7%Outkick: 2.1%Unattributed Quote10.6%This article: 1.1%David Hookstead: 0.0%Outkick: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection1.1%This article: 51.8%David Hookstead: 20.7%Outkick: 18.0%Biased Writer Voice51.8%This article: 3.5%David Hookstead: 1.7%Outkick: 2.4%Indoctrination3.5%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 0.0%Outkick: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Hookstead: 1.8%Outkick: 2.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 13.6%David Hookstead: 6.5%Outkick: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…13.6%

369 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker6.2%attributed speech346writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageParamount+ • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Paramount+

100%flagged-word coverage
23 attributed words100% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%30.0%60.0%Biased Writer Voice-55.2 ptsWriter: 55.2%Paramount+: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -14.5 ptsWriter: 14.5%Paramount+: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-11.3 ptsWriter: 11.3%Paramount+: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-3.8 ptsWriter: 3.8%Paramount+: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.2 ptsWriter: 1.2%Paramount+: 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.