Gothamist⁠76%

Petition with more than 5K signatures calls to keep High Line’s giant pigeon ⁠0%

By Giulia Heyward⁠49%

3/23/2026, 10:01:17 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Bandwagon, Anecdotal, and Appeal to Emotion, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 36.9% saturation with 76 hits. Analysis detected 384 faulty-reasoning hits from 206 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 21,176 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

A growing online petition is calling on city officials and the High Line to keep the towering pigeon sculpture known as “Dinosaur” in place permanently, as the popular artwork is set to be removed in the coming weeks after an 18-month run. 
More than 5,000 people had signed the petition as of Sunday afternoon. 
The 21-foot-tall aluminum pigeon overlooking the High Line Spur at 30th Street and 10th Avenue, by Colombian artist Iván Argote, has challenged New Yorkers to reevaluate their distaste for the bird. 
And it seems to have worked. 
A send-off event for “Dinosaur” over the weekend drew such large crowds that organizers said they could not guarantee entry for walk-up visitors after RSVPs filled up. 
Argote attended the event and signed posters, while visitors took part in trivia and bingo hosted by the winner of a pigeon impersonation contest. 
Supporters of the petition say the sculpture has become a beloved symbol of the city. 
One person wrote it is “a perfect embodiment of NYC spirit,” while another called it “my favorite art on the High Line” that “always makes me smile.” 
Others were more blunt, writing simply: “Keep the pigeon!!!” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.9%Giulia Heyward: 1.6%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias2.9%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.0%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.1%Giulia Heyward: 4.4%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic13.1%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.6%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%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: 20.4%Giulia Heyward: 9.2%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect20.4%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.9%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 3.9%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.9%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 7.6%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: 7.3%Giulia Heyward: 1.7%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias7.3%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.5%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%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: 1.7%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: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 7.0%Gothamist: 4.4%Appeal to Authority0.0%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: 2.9%Giulia Heyward: 2.9%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization2.9%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 32.5%Giulia Heyward: 1.1%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon32.5%This article: 24.8%Giulia Heyward: 6.4%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion24.8%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.0%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: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 30.6%Giulia Heyward: 1.7%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal30.6%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.7%Gothamist: 1.2%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: 0.1%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: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.8%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 36.9%Giulia Heyward: 2.6%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice36.9%This article: 15.0%Giulia Heyward: 2.6%Gothamist: 1.5%Indoctrination15.0%This article: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 0.4%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: 0.0%Giulia Heyward: 3.8%Gothamist: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

206 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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