The Current ⁠70%

By Matt Galloway⁠0%

6/12/2026, 6:17:21 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Framing Effect, and Halo Effect, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 77.8% saturation with 77 hits. Analysis detected 316 faulty-reasoning hits from 99 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 63.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠70% (6,563 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 70.00% of the article peer group.

This is a clip from The Current, a daily radio program from CBC Radio One. 
The program features three stories to expand your worldview, delivered daily. 
Host Matt Galloway cuts through a sea of choice to bring you stories that transcend the news cycle. 
Conversations with big thinkers, household names, and people living the news. 
An antidote to algorithms that cater to what you already know — and a meeting place for diverse perspectives. 
In its 20 years, The Current has become a go-to place for stories that shape and entertain us. 
Released daily, Monday to Friday. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 2.9%CBC: 2.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.2%CBC: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.1%Matt Galloway: 8.0%CBC: 3.1%Availability Heuristic11.1%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.3%CBC: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.4%CBC: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 48.5%Matt Galloway: 14.8%CBC: 4.2%Framing Effect48.5%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.0%CBC: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.5%CBC: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 18.2%Matt Galloway: 0.4%CBC: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect18.2%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 5.7%CBC: 4.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.5%CBC: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 13.0%CBC: 5.7%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.3%CBC: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.2%CBC: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.1%CBC: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 36.4%Matt Galloway: 8.4%CBC: 3.6%Halo Effect36.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.6%CBC: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.7%CBC: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.1%Matt Galloway: 11.5%CBC: 3.7%Appeal to Authority11.1%This article: 19.2%Matt Galloway: 1.4%CBC: 1.3%False Dilemma19.2%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.6%CBC: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 7.4%CBC: 4.8%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.7%CBC: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 2.7%CBC: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 11.1%Matt Galloway: 5.9%CBC: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion11.1%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.6%CBC: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.5%CBC: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.4%CBC: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.5%CBC: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 5.8%CBC: 3.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.8%CBC: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.2%CBC: 1.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.0%CBC: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 55.6%Matt Galloway: 15.9%CBC: 4.8%Biased Writer Voice55.6%This article: 30.3%Matt Galloway: 6.0%CBC: 2.4%Indoctrination30.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 1.5%CBC: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 77.8%Matt Galloway: 4.8%CBC: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…77.8%

99 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker18%attributed speech81writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageMatt Galloway • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Matt Galloway

100%flagged-word coverage
18 attributed words100% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+54.3 ptsWriter: 45.7%Matt Galloway: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +27.2 ptsWriter: 72.8%Matt Galloway: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination-37.0 ptsWriter: 37.0%Matt Galloway: 0.0%0.0%

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.