Home insurance rates skyrocketing in Washington ⁠88%

By Alexis Weisend⁠99% The Seattle Times⁠54%

7/30/2026, 4:14:22 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 50.9% saturation with 29 hits. Analysis detected 224 faulty-reasoning hits from 57 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 75% and a BS Rank of ⁠88% (3,424 of 27,714 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 87.60% of the article peer group.

Although Washington has some of the lowest home insurance premiums in the nation, homeowners have struggled with surging rates since the pandemic. 
Home insurance rates have shot up 55 percent between 2020 and 2025, reinforcing another barrier for buyers in the state’s already-challenging housing market, according to a recent LendingTree report. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 50.9%Alexis Weisend: 12.7%The Columbian: 3.5%Confirmation Bias50.9%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 12.7%The Columbian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 3.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 50.9%Alexis Weisend: 47.4%The Columbian: 6.8%Framing Effect50.9%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 49.1%Alexis Weisend: 27.2%The Columbian: 9.4%Negativity Bias49.1%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.6%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 12.7%The Columbian: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 50.9%Alexis Weisend: 38.2%The Columbian: 3.3%Appeal to Authority50.9%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 3.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 4.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 50.9%Alexis Weisend: 22.4%The Columbian: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)50.9%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 50.9%Alexis Weisend: 12.7%The Columbian: 0.3%Burden of Proof50.9%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 38.6%Alexis Weisend: 9.6%The Columbian: 0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)38.6%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.5%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 50.9%Alexis Weisend: 12.7%The Columbian: 2.6%Unattributed Quote50.9%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 25.0%The Columbian: 5.7%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexis Weisend: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

57 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker51%attributed speech28writer words
Selected voice

LendingTree

100%flagged-word coverage
29 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%LendingTree: 100.0%100.0%

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.