Former U.S. congresswoman wants to “fix” Canada/US relationship ⁠74%

5/7/2026, 5:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 88.7% saturation with 63 hits. Analysis detected 241 faulty-reasoning hits from 71 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 65.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠74% (5,886 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.10% of the article peer group.

Former Democrat Congresswoman Jane Harman is the newly-appointed co-chair of a Commission for the Second Century of Canada-U.S. relations, an attempt to revive the bilateral relationship between the two countries. 
While she believes it can eventually be repaired, she says she's "heartbroken" about the way things have disintegrated under President Donald Trump, and believes Prime Minister Mark Carney is navigating the rupture "adroitly." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 46.5%CBC: 2.6%Confirmation Bias46.5%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 3.1%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 11.3%CBC: 4.2%Framing Effect11.3%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 4.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 46.5%CBC: 5.7%Negativity Bias46.5%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 3.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 42.3%CBC: 3.7%Appeal to Authority42.3%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 4.8%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 46.5%CBC: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion46.5%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 46.5%CBC: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)46.5%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 3.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 88.7%CBC: 1.1%Unattributed Quote88.7%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 11.3%CBC: 4.8%Biased Writer Voice11.3%This article: 0.0%CBC: 2.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

71 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker46%attributed speech38writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageJane Harman • 33 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jane Harman

100%flagged-word coverage
33 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+21.1 ptsWriter: 78.9%Jane Harman: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-21.1 ptsWriter: 21.1%Jane Harman: 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.