Man facing divorce kills 8 children, including 7 of his own, in shooting rampage ⁠74%

By Molly Hennessy-Fiske⁠0% Mariana Alfaro⁠0% Chris Hacker⁠0%

4/19/2026, 4:56:46 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Confirmation Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 39% saturation with 39 hits. Analysis detected 184 faulty-reasoning hits from 100 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 65.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠74% (5,830 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.40% of the article peer group.

Man facing divorce kills 8 children, including 7 of his own, in shooting rampage 
The gunman is dead, and his brother-in-law said he was distraught in a recent conversation about his breakup. 
The Louisiana shooting was the country's deadliest mass killing in two years. 
SHREVEPORT, Louisiana — Eight children ranging in age from 1 to about 14 were killed here Sunday in a shooting that police described as a domestic disturbance. 
It was the deadliest mass killing in the United States in two years, data shows. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 27.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 6.8%The Washington Post: 3.8%Confirmation Bias27.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 6.8%The Washington Post: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 18.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 11.3%The Washington Post: 4.9%Availability Heuristic18.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 28.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 14.0%The Washington Post: 21.5%Framing Effect28.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 3.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 3.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 27.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 34.5%The Washington Post: 18.5%Negativity Bias27.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 4.5%The Washington Post: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 12.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 3.0%The Washington Post: 2.4%Recency Bias12.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 39.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 9.8%The Washington Post: 5.2%Appeal to Authority39.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 6.8%The Washington Post: 5.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 14.0%The Washington Post: 6.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 4.5%The Washington Post: 4.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 4.5%The Washington Post: 1.9%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 15.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 3.8%The Washington Post: 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)15.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 18.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 4.5%The Washington Post: 4.8%Unattributed Quote18.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 14.0%The Washington Post: 15.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 3.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Hennessy-Fiske: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

100 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.