STLPR0%

City truck totaled in fire while monitoring giant hole under I-44 in St. Louis 2%

By Chad Davis0%

6/18/2026, 9:21:48 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 6 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Biased Writer Voice, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 34.7% saturation with 58 hits. Analysis detected 139 faulty-reasoning hits from 167 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 12.1% and a BS Rank of 2% (21,483 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 98.20% of the article peer group.

A fire took down a St. 
Louis Street Division truck next to where a water main break opened a large hole downtown. 
The fire occurred Thursday morning at Biddle Street and North Broadway when a street department worker arrived on the scene for routine monitoring of the cave-in. 
A spokesperson for the street department confirmed the incident. 
The driver smelled something strange and exited the vehicle before the truck caught fire. 
Street department workers and firefighters extinguished the fire. 
No one was injured. 
A street department spokesperson said that the vehicle is now with the city’s equipment services division but that discovering a cause of the fire may be impossible because of the significant damages. 
The truck, which was totaled, was last serviced in March. 
Last weekend, the 30-foot-wide cave-in opened underneath Interstate 44. 
The St. 
Louis Water Division said the hole was caused by broken water mains and an aging water infrastructure. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 8.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.3%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 1.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 4.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 4.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 19.2%Chad Davis: 2.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.9%Pessimism Bias19.2%This article: 2.4%Chad Davis: 9.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.1%Negativity Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 2.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 3.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.4%Chad Davis: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Recency Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 15.6%Chad Davis: 2.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.6%Appeal to Authority15.6%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 3.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.7%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 9.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 1.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 3.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 34.7%Chad Davis: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Unattributed Quote34.7%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.0%Chad Davis: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.8%Biased Writer Voice6.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chad Davis: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

167 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker10%attributed speech150writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageLouis Water Division • 17 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Louis Water Division

100%flagged-word coverage
17 attributed words100% of attributed speech43% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+72.7 ptsWriter: 27.3%Louis Water Division: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-6.7 ptsWriter: 6.7%Louis Water Division: 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.