Gothamist⁠77%

MTA's new bus simulators let drivers practice NYC chaos before the road ⁠56%

By Giulia Heyward⁠48%

4/19/2026, 2:39:09 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Framing Effect, and Representativeness Heuristic, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 52.9% saturation with 101 hits. Analysis detected 603 faulty-reasoning hits from 191 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 53.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠56% (9,620 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 56.00% of the article peer group.

Before they brave New York City traffic, bus drivers can now test their skills safely inside new simulators from the MTA. 
The simulators, which cost the MTA a total of $1.4 million, update technology the agency has used for years to train drivers, officials said. 
Thousands of bus operators are expected to train on the new systems, which are designed to replicate the layouts of diesel, hybrid, electric and articulated buses, giving trainees an experience close to the real thing. 
The simulators are also customizable, allowing instructors to create specific scenarios during training. 
One simulator is located at Brooklyn’s Spring Creek Depot, with three others at the Zerega Training Center in the Bronx. 
MTA Chair and CEO Janno Lieber said the agency is “already seeing the benefits” of the new technology. 
“These simulators help bus operators quickly build the skills and confidence to navigate NYC streets – safely and speedily – even before they hit the road,” he said in a statement on Sunday 
The MTA said at least 4,300 bus operators will train on the simulators each year. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.4%Giulia Heyward: 1.8%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias9.4%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.0%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 4.5%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 18.3%Giulia Heyward: 0.5%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic18.3%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.8%Gothamist: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 23.6%Giulia Heyward: 8.9%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect23.6%This article: 11.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion11.0%This article: 12.6%Giulia Heyward: 0.9%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias12.6%This article: 12.6%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect12.6%This article: 52.9%Giulia Heyward: 3.7%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias52.9%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.0%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 7.5%Gothamist: 8.5%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.0%Gothamist: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.6%Gothamist: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.6%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 9.4%Giulia Heyward: 2.4%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect9.4%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.8%Gothamist: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.3%Gothamist: 1.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 39.3%Giulia Heyward: 6.7%Gothamist: 4.4%Appeal to Authority39.3%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.7%Gothamist: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 18.3%Giulia Heyward: 3.2%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization18.3%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.0%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 17.3%Giulia Heyward: 6.3%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion17.3%This article: 17.3%Giulia Heyward: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question17.3%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.1%Gothamist: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 9.4%Giulia Heyward: 1.8%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal9.4%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.8%Gothamist: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 12.6%Giulia Heyward: 1.7%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote12.6%This article: 17.3%Giulia Heyward: 0.9%Gothamist: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection17.3%This article: 15.7%Giulia Heyward: 2.7%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice15.7%This article: 11.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.5%Gothamist: 1.5%Indoctrination11.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.5%Gothamist: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 7.9%Giulia Heyward: 3.7%Gothamist: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.9%

191 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers35%attributed speech125writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageJanno Lieber • 18 words • 100.0% coverageJanno Lieber • 33 words • 100.0% coverageMTA • 15 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Janno Lieber

100%flagged-word coverage
51 attributed words77% of attributed speech74% writer coverage
0%32.5%65.0%Quote-first Misdirection+64.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Janno Lieber: 64.7%64.7%Biased Writer Voice+25.7 ptsWriter: 9.6%Janno Lieber: 35.3%35.3%Unattributed Quote-19.2 ptsWriter: 19.2%Janno Lieber: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-16.8 ptsWriter: 16.8%Janno Lieber: 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.