Walgreens to close Chicago store after losing over $1M due to rampant theft, falling sales 73%

By Eric Revell74%

5/11/2026, 11:08:02 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Framing Effect, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 33.8% saturation with 161 hits. Analysis detected 807 faulty-reasoning hits from 476 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 64.9% and a BS Rank of 73% (6,037 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 72.40% of the article peer group.

Walgreens announced plans to close a location on Chicago's South Side next month as the store's profitability suffered due to elevated levels of theft as well as a decline in prescription sales. 
The pharmacy chain revealed the reasons behind its decision to close the Walgreens at 86th in Cottage Grove in the Chatham neighborhood of Chicago at a town hall in the community on Saturday. 
"I'm here today because we're closing the store at 86th and Cottage Grove. 
But I just want to make sure everyone understands closing stores [is] not our goal. 
This is the last resort," Walgreens regional Vice President Reginald Johnson said, according to Fox 32 Chicago. 
Walgreens executives revealed at the town hall that the location lost over $1 million last year amid softening prescription sales and significant levels of theft, which resulted in the decision to close the store on June 4. 
CHICAGO OFFICE MARKET IN FREEFALL AMID NATIONAL DOWNTURN 
Johnson said that "theft at this store is 16%," which is "four times above the company average," which contributed to losses at the store. 
The company said that it took measures to counteract theft at the store, but was unable to put an end to the issues at the location. 
"Lock boxes help us protect the merchandise in the store. 
A lot of the time, those lock boxes were getting destroyed. 
And that's at a great cost to the company," said Walgreens district manager Jason Vasquez, according to Fox 32's report. 
WALGREENS TO CLOSE 1,200 STORES AS PART OF TURNAROUND EFFORT 
It also said that Walgreens was spending $400,000 a year on security guards at the store, but employees still faced attacks and threats amid the theft at the location. 
"We've had people jump across the counters, because we sell liquor behind the counter, taking liquor, cigarettes," said Lonnie Fuqua, the store's manager. 
"That wears down. 
Not so much the financial piece but the endurance of that day in and day out." 
Residents and customers of the location expressed concern at the town hall about access to their prescriptions and frustration with having to go to a location farther away from their neighborhood, Fox 32 reported. 
CHICAGO COMMUNITY LEADER MAKES PLEA FOR BILLIONAIRES' RETURN TO THE WINDY CITY 
The company is encouraging customers to use another Walgreens location that's about 1 mile away and is reaching out via mail and email to inform customers about how they can have their prescriptions delivered by mail. 
"For seniors, there's some solutions that have been put in place where you'll get free delivery. 
That has already started for those medications you may have that, under the law, can be delivered," Fuqua said. 
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE 
FOX Business reached out to Walgreens for comment. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.2%Eric Revell: 2.6%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Confirmation Bias8.2%This article: 5.0%Eric Revell: 4.7%FoxBusiness: 3.4%Anchoring Bias5.0%This article: 5.0%Eric Revell: 3.6%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Availability Heuristic5.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.0%FoxBusiness: 3.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 23.1%Eric Revell: 11.0%FoxBusiness: 12.9%Framing Effect23.1%This article: 4.2%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.5%Loss Aversion4.2%This article: 11.1%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Status Quo Bias11.1%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.4%Eric Revell: 9.5%FoxBusiness: 8.8%Optimism Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.7%FoxBusiness: 2.0%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 33.8%Eric Revell: 6.9%FoxBusiness: 7.9%Negativity Bias33.8%This article: 8.6%Eric Revell: 2.5%FoxBusiness: 4.5%Self-Serving Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.5%FoxBusiness: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.6%FoxBusiness: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.1%FoxBusiness: 3.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 2.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 6.7%FoxBusiness: 7.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.2%FoxBusiness: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.3%Eric Revell: 4.2%FoxBusiness: 6.3%Hasty Generalization2.3%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 7.8%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Bandwagon7.8%This article: 6.5%Eric Revell: 3.4%FoxBusiness: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion6.5%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 28.8%Eric Revell: 3.9%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)28.8%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 12.0%Eric Revell: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 2.4%Anecdotal12.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 2.1%FoxBusiness: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.8%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.8%Unattributed Quote7.8%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.2%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.9%FoxBusiness: 1.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 2.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.9%

476 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers39%attributed speech289writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageReginald Johnson • 13 words • 0.0% coverageReginald Johnson • 15 words • 0.0% coverageReginald Johnson • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageReginald Johnson • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageJason Vasquez • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJason Vasquez • 11 words • 0.0% coverageJason Vasquez • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageLonnie Fuqua • 23 words • 0.0% coverageLonnie Fuqua • 3 words • 0.0% coverageLonnie Fuqua • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageLonnie Fuqua • 16 words • 0.0% coverageLonnie Fuqua • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jason Vasquez

76%flagged-word coverage
41 attributed words22% of attributed speech79% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Unattributed Quote+48.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Jason Vasquez: 48.8%48.8%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.1 ptsWriter: 3.1%Jason Vasquez: 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.