Shooting at South Carolina mall leaves at least two people wounded ⁠10%

By Jasmine Fernández⁠0%

6/13/2026, 3:35:47 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Authority, and Primacy Effect, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 42.7% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 299 faulty-reasoning hits from 131 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠10% (19,695 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 90.00% of the article peer group.

Multiple people were wounded after a shooting at the Haywood Mall in Greenville, South Carolina, on Saturday afternoon, according to local authorities. 
The Greenville Police Department confirmed to FOX Carolina that at least two victims were transported to a local hospital following the incident at the retail complex, which is the largest shopping mall in South Carolina. 
Law enforcement officials have detained multiple individuals in connection with the shooting, the local station reported. 
Preliminary details indicate the gunfire stemmed from a dispute and was not a random attack, according to police. 
No additional shots were fired after officers arrived on the scene. 
The facility will remain closed until further notice, and the public has been asked to avoid the area. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.7%Jasmine Fernández: 1.5%The Independent: 2.9%Confirmation Bias13.7%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.5%The Independent: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 12.2%Jasmine Fernández: 3.3%The Independent: 3.2%Availability Heuristic12.2%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.5%The Independent: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.2%The Independent: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.1%The Independent: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 6.4%The Independent: 8.2%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 13.7%Jasmine Fernández: 0.9%The Independent: 0.5%Loss Aversion13.7%This article: 13.7%Jasmine Fernández: 0.6%The Independent: 0.6%Status Quo Bias13.7%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.2%The Independent: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.8%The Independent: 2.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.8%The Independent: 1.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.4%Jasmine Fernández: 9.2%The Independent: 12.2%Negativity Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.0%The Independent: 2.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.3%The Independent: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.3%The Independent: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.1%The Independent: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.3%The Independent: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 3.4%The Independent: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.3%The Independent: 1.5%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 26.7%Jasmine Fernández: 0.5%The Independent: 0.4%Primacy Effect26.7%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.5%The Independent: 2.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 29.0%Jasmine Fernández: 4.7%The Independent: 3.8%Appeal to Authority29.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.4%The Independent: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.1%The Independent: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.1%The Independent: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.3%The Independent: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.3%The Independent: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.4%The Independent: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 4.3%The Independent: 6.5%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 13.7%Jasmine Fernández: 0.5%The Independent: 0.9%Begging the Question13.7%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.9%The Independent: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.3%The Independent: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.3%The Independent: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.2%The Independent: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.1%The Independent: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.6%The Independent: 2.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 1.7%The Independent: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.1%The Independent: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 42.7%Jasmine Fernández: 1.7%The Independent: 2.6%Unattributed Quote42.7%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 2.2%The Independent: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 40.5%Jasmine Fernández: 2.7%The Independent: 7.8%Biased Writer Voice40.5%This article: 13.7%Jasmine Fernández: 2.3%The Independent: 1.3%Indoctrination13.7%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.9%The Independent: 2.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.3%The Independent: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jasmine Fernández: 0.0%The Independent: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

131 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker27%attributed speech96writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageGreenville Police Department • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
35 attributed words100% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+81.3 ptsWriter: 18.8%Greenville Police Department: 100.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote-58.3 ptsWriter: 58.3%Greenville Police Department: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-18.8 ptsWriter: 18.8%Greenville Police Department: 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.