Mediaite⁠70%

US and Iran Agree to Stop Attacking Each Other — Yet Again ⁠56%

By Jennifer Bowers Bahney⁠52%

6/28/2026, 10:36:29 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Recency Bias, and Optimism Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 51.5% saturation with 184 hits. Analysis detected 1,132 faulty-reasoning hits from 357 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 53.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠56% (9,751 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 55.50% of the article peer group.

The U.S. and Iran have agreed to stop attacking each other once again, according to new reporting from Axios's Barak Ravid. 
“We decided to stop all the kinetic activity,” a senior U.S. official told Axios on Sunday, following a weekend of airstrikes on both sides. 
A U.S. official confirmed to CNN that both sides still plan to meet Tuesday in Qatar to try to resolve the dispute over the Strait of Hormuz. 
CNN's Julia Pembroke reported, “A senior administration official tells me that those talks will continue on as planned. 
They went on to say this: ‘Nothing has been canceled. 
Technical talks regarding the implementation of the MOU, the Memorandum of Understanding, are on track for the coming days as planned, and deconfliction channels are up and running after the Lake Lucerne summit.'" 
Pembroke continued: 
Now, Secretary of State Marc Rubio had previously said that some of these talks would take place at an expert level on June 30th, just a couple of days away now, and a reminder that last weekend, that's when Vice President J.D. 
Vance led these high stakes, high level talks in Switzerland, really kicking off the technical talks and the Memorandum of Understanding, which has been signed by both the United States and Iran, was really just a starting off point because it started this 60 day time period. 
To get into the details on some of the big issues, like Iran's nuclear program and the fate of its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. 
But all of this recent back and forth that's taken place over the past couple of days, one big moment came Saturday evening when U.S. 
Central Command confirmed that it had carried out, at the direction of the president, it had carried out additional strikes on multiple targets in response to it said “Iran's continued aggression.” 
Now, following that development, Trump took to social media and he said that Iran may never learn. 
And if they didn’t, that if that happens, the Islamic Republic of Iran “will no longer exist.” 
Watch the clip above via CNN. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.4%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 5.6%Mediaite: 5.0%Confirmation Bias10.4%This article: 11.8%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 2.8%Mediaite: 0.9%Anchoring Bias11.8%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 3.0%Mediaite: 3.8%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 19.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 1.0%Mediaite: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic19.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.6%Mediaite: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 3.8%Mediaite: 2.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.7%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 10.9%Mediaite: 9.1%Framing Effect6.7%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.3%Mediaite: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.4%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.4%Mediaite: 0.4%Status Quo Bias3.4%This article: 13.2%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.5%Mediaite: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect13.2%This article: 32.8%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 3.2%Mediaite: 1.2%Optimism Bias32.8%This article: 4.8%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 2.2%Mediaite: 1.6%Pessimism Bias4.8%This article: 51.5%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 9.9%Mediaite: 14.7%Negativity Bias51.5%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 1.6%Mediaite: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 8.7%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.3%Mediaite: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error8.7%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.2%Mediaite: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 1.5%Mediaite: 2.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.7%Mediaite: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 13.2%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.8%Mediaite: 1.3%Halo Effect13.2%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 37.8%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 5.0%Mediaite: 2.3%Recency Bias37.8%This article: 5.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.6%Mediaite: 0.6%Primacy Effect5.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.8%Mediaite: 3.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 48.2%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 7.0%Mediaite: 3.5%Appeal to Authority48.2%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 2.5%Mediaite: 2.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 4.8%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 2.2%Mediaite: 1.3%Slippery Slope4.8%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 4.5%Mediaite: 7.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.6%Mediaite: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.8%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 2.9%Mediaite: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion4.8%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.9%Mediaite: 1.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 8.7%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 3.8%Mediaite: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.7%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.2%Mediaite: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 1.0%Mediaite: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.6%Mediaite: 3.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.3%Mediaite: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 2.7%Mediaite: 2.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.4%Mediaite: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.8%Mediaite: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 14.3%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 8.5%Mediaite: 3.3%Unattributed Quote14.3%This article: 16.5%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 3.5%Mediaite: 3.2%Quote-first Misdirection16.5%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 3.6%Mediaite: 8.3%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.6%Mediaite: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.3%Mediaite: 2.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 3.6%Mediaite: 1.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.7%Jennifer Bowers Bahney: 0.7%Mediaite: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.7%

357 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers56%attributed speech157writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageJulia Pembroke • 18 words • 100.0% coverageJulia Pembroke • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJulia Pembroke • 33 words • 0.0% coverageJulia Pembroke • 2 words • 0.0% coverageMarc Rubio • 42 words • 0.0% coverageJ.D. Vance • 47 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageCentral Command • 31 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

J.D. Vance

100%flagged-word coverage
47 attributed words24% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Unattributed Quote-32.5 ptsWriter: 32.5%J.D. Vance: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-26.1 ptsWriter: 26.1%J.D. Vance: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.8 ptsWriter: 3.8%J.D. Vance: 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.