KUER⁠0%

July 18 - KUER Mug Stop: Hidden Peaks Coffee ⁠65%

By KUER 90.1⁠0%

6/30/2026, 6:01:31 PM

Topics: Events

BS Summary: This article contains 6 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Loss Aversion, and Optimism Bias, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 111 hits. Analysis detected 239 faulty-reasoning hits from 111 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 59.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠65% (7,301 of 20,518 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 64.40% of the article peer group.

On Saturday, July 18, KUER will be at Hidden Peaks Coffee and Roasting Co. in Salt Lake City for a Mug Stop from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. 
Stop by the coffee shop to chat with KUER news director Elaine Clark, snag an exclusive mug and enjoy some great coffee. 
For a $20 donation, you'll be able to get our new mug designed by local artist Paul Tew. 
This sleek design is only available in-person at our Mug Stops. 
Summer Mug Stop: Hidden Peaks Coffee 
Saturday, July 18, 2026 | 8 a.m. - 10 a.m. 
4879 S Redwood Road, Salt Lake City 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.3%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 9.9%KUER 90.1: 0.5%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias9.9%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 4.7%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.2%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.3%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.5%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 49.5%KUER 90.1: 5.8%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect49.5%This article: 26.1%KUER 90.1: 1.7%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion26.1%This article: 9.9%KUER 90.1: 0.4%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias9.9%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 19.8%KUER 90.1: 3.0%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias19.8%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.9%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 2.5%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.6%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.2%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.0%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 2.5%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.3%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.9%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 2.7%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.9%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.2%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 2.4%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.2%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.1%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.5%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 3.9%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 1.0%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.3%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.6%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 6.4%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 3.8%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.0%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER 90.1: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 100.0%KUER 90.1: 26.3%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…100.0%

111 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker45%attributed speech61writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageKUER • 28 words • 100.0% coverageKUER • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

KUER

100%flagged-word coverage
50 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +0.0 ptsWriter: 100.0%KUER: 100.0%100.0%

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.