Logan Airport sees hundreds of delays and cancellations due to thunderstorms ⁠48%

By Samantha Genzer⁠8%

7/21/2026, 12:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Pessimism Bias, with Representativeness Heuristic as the most egregious example at 27.9% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 213 faulty-reasoning hits from 201 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 49.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠48% (10,810 of 20,473 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 52.80% of the article peer group.

Boston Logan International Airport is seeing hundreds of delays and cancellations Tuesday night amid a thunderstorm. 
The airport had accumulated 437 delays and 315 flight cancellations at around 9 p.m., according to flight tracking service FlightAware. 
The disruptions are due to severe weather conditions, a Massachusetts Port Authority spokesperson confirmed. 
“Passengers should check with their airline for the best information about their flight,” the spokesperson told Boston.com. 
Steady rain and thunderstorms began during the early evening commute, and rain is predicted to continue throughout the night. 
The storms prompted flood warnings and tornado watches in other parts of New England. 
Around 8 p.m. 
Tuesday, the Federal Aviation Administration issued a ground stop at Logan Airport due to the thunderstorms. 
Ground stops were also issued at several other major airports along the East Coast: Baltimore/Washington International Airport in Maryland; Newark Liberty International Airport and Teterboro Airport in New Jersey; LaGuardia Airport and Westchester County Airport in New York; Philadelphia International Airport in Pennsylvania; and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Washington Dulles International Airport in Virginia. 
The thunderstorms are anticipated to gradually weaken into rain, persisting overnight and into Wednesday morning. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.9%Boston.com: 2.3%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.2%Boston.com: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Samantha Genzer: 2.1%Boston.com: 3.1%Availability Heuristic7.0%This article: 27.9%Samantha Genzer: 0.9%Boston.com: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic27.9%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.2%Boston.com: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.5%Boston.com: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 2.8%Boston.com: 6.0%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.6%Boston.com: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.4%Boston.com: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.5%Samantha Genzer: 1.9%Boston.com: 2.2%Optimism Bias7.5%This article: 9.5%Samantha Genzer: 0.8%Boston.com: 1.1%Pessimism Bias9.5%This article: 13.4%Samantha Genzer: 4.1%Boston.com: 6.3%Negativity Bias13.4%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.4%Boston.com: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.4%Boston.com: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.7%Boston.com: 1.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.6%Boston.com: 2.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.5%Samantha Genzer: 1.0%Boston.com: 1.4%Recency Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.0%Samantha Genzer: 2.8%Boston.com: 4.1%Appeal to Authority7.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.7%Boston.com: 1.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.4%Boston.com: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.2%Boston.com: 3.2%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.3%Boston.com: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 6.3%Boston.com: 6.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.7%Boston.com: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.0%Boston.com: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.3%Boston.com: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.1%Boston.com: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.5%Boston.com: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.5%Boston.com: 1.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 8.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.5%Boston.com: 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection8.0%This article: 10.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.0%Boston.com: 4.2%Biased Writer Voice10.0%This article: 8.5%Samantha Genzer: 1.8%Boston.com: 1.1%Indoctrination8.5%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Samantha Genzer: 1.3%Boston.com: 2.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

201 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers15%attributed speech171writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageMassachusetts Port Authority • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageFederal Aviation Administration • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 56 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
16 attributed words53% of attributed speech98% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Federal Aviation Administration: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-11.7 ptsWriter: 11.7%Federal Aviation Administration: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-9.9 ptsWriter: 9.9%Federal Aviation Administration: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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