STLPR0%

In first for St. Louis, board President Megan Green begins maternity leave 41%

By Rachel Lippmann0%

5/1/2026, 4:56:01 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 4 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Politically Left Leaning Bias, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 26.1% saturation with 46 hits. Analysis detected 102 faulty-reasoning hits from 176 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 45.5% and a BS Rank of 41% (12,673 of 21,180 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 59.80% of the article peer group.

For the first time in St. 
Louis history, the president of the Board of Aldermen is on maternity leave. 
Megan Green began her scheduled time off Thursday. 
She is the first woman to be elected to the office. 
Third Ward Alderman Shane Cohn, the board’s vice president, will serve as acting president until she returns. 
Cohn said in a statement posted on Facebook that he was honored to step into the president’s seat. 
“I’m committed to keeping the work of the Board moving forward—focused on delivering for our neighborhoods, strengthening city services, and continuing the progress we’ve made together,” he said. 
“As St. 
Louis keeps moving, I’m ready to serve in this role with the same dedication and collaboration you expect.” 
Green’s staff will provide procedural and logistics support to Cohn and will continue to work to advance her policy agenda. 
A post on Green’s official Facebook page said, “We’re grateful for her leadership and look forward to welcoming her back when she’s ready.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 2.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 2.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 7.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.3%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 26.1%Rachel Lippmann: 4.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 4.8%Optimism Bias26.1%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 2.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 7.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.1%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 3.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 19.3%Rachel Lippmann: 2.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Halo Effect19.3%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 3.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 2.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.7%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 7.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.3%Rachel Lippmann: 1.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.8%Biased Writer Voice6.3%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 6.3%Rachel Lippmann: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias6.3%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rachel Lippmann: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

176 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers51%attributed speech87writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageShane Cohn • 18 words • 0.0% coverageShane Cohn • 28 words • 0.0% coverageShane Cohn • 2 words • 0.0% coverageShane Cohn • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageGreen’s official Facebook page • 23 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
23 attributed words26% of attributed speech13% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-12.6 ptsWriter: 12.6%Green’s official Facebook page: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-12.6 ptsWriter: 12.6%Green’s official Facebook page: 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.