BS Summary: This article contains 30 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Confirmation Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 35.6% saturation with 218 hits. Analysis detected 1,871 faulty-reasoning hits from 612 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 83.2% and a BS Rank of 90% (2,192 of 20,498 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 89.30% of the article peer group.

If you attend one of the peaceful protests being held across Houston this weekend  and you should  you’re likely to see many different signs. 
Join the Saturday march at City Hall or the Sunday 2 p.m. event at Ervan Chew Park and no doubt you’ll see banners proclaiming that Houston is a city of immigrants, that Houstonians stand with their undocumented neighbors, and even some calls to abolish ICE. 
But in the broad coalition of Houstonians upset about Immigration and Customs Enforcement fatally shooting Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, there are plenty of perspectives that don’t fit easily onto an 18-by-24-inch protest sign. 
There are those  like this editorial board  who believe this tragic death underscores the importance of Congress working quickly to provide greater oversight of ICE and finally pass robust immigration reform that secures the border, keeps out criminals and provides a path to legal residency for longtime Houstonians who have built their lives here. 
There are some who would echo Mayor John Whitmire when he told CNN’s Kate Bolduan that he was “frustrated, sad and mad” about the pattern of death at the hands of ICE agents. 
Whitmire said he supported a moratorium on immigration enforcement until ICE conducts a review of its practices and fits all of its agents with body-worn cameras 
There are even Trump-supporting Republicans who look at this shooting and find themselves agreeing with Gov. 
Greg Abbott, who drew a line at ICE agents spilling blood. 
“I fully expect our immigration laws to be enforced, but it's proven that immigration laws can be enforced, and stopping illegal immigration from coming across our border can be achieved without shooting people," Abbott said Wednesday, while announcing that Texas Rangers would investigate Salgado’s death. 
That’s a very broad coalition of views  Houstonians from across the political spectrum who have plenty of bitter disagreements, but they all want to see real reforms so that Houstonians aren’t killed in the street over a non-criminal violation of immigration law. 
From street activists to the governor himself, we all want to see an end to the chaos and violence that ICE brought to our city. 
Perhaps the only thing more astounding than the breadth of that agreement is the fact that far too many Americans aren’t part of it. 
Notably missing is President Donald Trump himself. 
Even after his administration announced a pause on dangerous vehicle stops, the president unilaterally called on ICE to continue its reckless practices that resulted in the deaths of Salgado and Joan Sebastian Guerrero in Maine. 
“The men and women of ICE are doing a GREAT job,” he posted on social media. 
Reading his words, we find ourselves agreeing with a sentiment the mayor shared on CNN. 
“Where’s the compassion from the federal government?” 
Whitmire said. 
“Mr. 
Araujo ought to be going to work this morning.” 
To the president, however, that kind of basic humanity just makes Whitmire one of the “Radical Left Dumocrats.” 
Of course, Houstonians know that’s not true. 
We know there are moderates, MAGA voters and people who don’t fit neatly on any political spectrum who all agree that Salgado should be alive today. 
That law enforcement is supposed to protect and serve. 
That they’re supposed to be the good guys. 
That they’re not supposed to kill someone after chasing them in unmarked vehicles in a scene that looks more like a carjacking than a law enforcement action. 
More than anything, that’s what these protests are about. 
That’s what we can all agree on. 
Houstonians want ICE to stop killing people. 
Put it on a protest sign. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 27.6%The Editorial Board: 7.8%Houston Chronicle: 3.0%Confirmation Bias27.6%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%The Editorial Board: 8.2%Houston Chronicle: 2.5%Availability Heuristic3.9%This article: 11.3%The Editorial Board: 1.7%Houston Chronicle: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic11.3%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 1.5%Houston Chronicle: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.4%Houston Chronicle: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 19.3%The Editorial Board: 8.2%Houston Chronicle: 4.4%Framing Effect19.3%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.4%Houston Chronicle: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.7%Houston Chronicle: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.4%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.2%The Editorial Board: 4.4%Houston Chronicle: 1.7%Optimism Bias4.2%This article: 3.9%The Editorial Board: 2.2%Houston Chronicle: 1.1%Pessimism Bias3.9%This article: 27.0%The Editorial Board: 10.4%Houston Chronicle: 5.2%Negativity Bias27.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 2.5%Houston Chronicle: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 16.7%The Editorial Board: 6.6%Houston Chronicle: 1.1%In-Group Bias16.7%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 1.3%Houston Chronicle: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%The Editorial Board: 3.4%Houston Chronicle: 2.1%Halo Effect1.3%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.1%The Editorial Board: 3.2%Houston Chronicle: 1.1%Recency Bias1.1%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 2.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.3%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%The Editorial Board: 2.3%Houston Chronicle: 0.3%Ad Hominem2.9%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.8%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.8%The Editorial Board: 3.5%Houston Chronicle: 3.1%Appeal to Authority9.8%This article: 7.0%The Editorial Board: 3.5%Houston Chronicle: 0.8%False Dilemma7.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.4%Houston Chronicle: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.7%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.4%The Editorial Board: 18.0%Houston Chronicle: 3.3%Hasty Generalization7.4%This article: 1.1%The Editorial Board: 0.1%Houston Chronicle: 0.2%Red Herring1.1%This article: 19.4%The Editorial Board: 6.9%Houston Chronicle: 0.6%Bandwagon19.4%This article: 31.4%The Editorial Board: 9.7%Houston Chronicle: 4.7%Appeal to Emotion31.4%This article: 9.2%The Editorial Board: 2.5%Houston Chronicle: 0.6%Begging the Question9.2%This article: 5.7%The Editorial Board: 4.8%Houston Chronicle: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.7%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 1.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 1.5%The Editorial Board: 0.1%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Appeal to Nature1.5%This article: 1.5%The Editorial Board: 0.6%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Composition/Division1.5%This article: 4.4%The Editorial Board: 3.8%Houston Chronicle: 2.0%Anecdotal4.4%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.4%The Editorial Board: 1.2%Houston Chronicle: 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.4%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%The Editorial Board: 0.0%Houston Chronicle: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.2%The Editorial Board: 1.5%Houston Chronicle: 0.9%Unattributed Quote8.2%This article: 5.6%The Editorial Board: 1.5%Houston Chronicle: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection5.6%This article: 35.6%The Editorial Board: 24.6%Houston Chronicle: 2.3%Biased Writer Voice35.6%This article: 17.2%The Editorial Board: 9.6%Houston Chronicle: 1.3%Indoctrination17.2%This article: 4.1%The Editorial Board: 5.0%Houston Chronicle: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias4.1%This article: 5.7%The Editorial Board: 0.9%Houston Chronicle: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias5.7%This article: 7.4%The Editorial Board: 1.0%Houston Chronicle: 1.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.4%

612 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers22%attributed speech478writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 56 words • 100.0% coverageMayor John Whitmire • 33 words • 100.0% coverageMayor John Whitmire • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageGreg Abbott • 11 words • 0.0% coverageGreg Abbott • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageMayor John Whitmire • 7 words • 0.0% coverageMayor John Whitmire • 2 words • 0.0% coverageMayor John Whitmire • 1 words • 100.0% coverageMayor John Whitmire • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Greg Abbott

100%flagged-word coverage
56 attributed words42% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Biased Writer Voice-45.6 ptsWriter: 45.6%Greg Abbott: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-22.0 ptsWriter: 22.0%Greg Abbott: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -9.4 ptsWriter: 9.4%Greg Abbott: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -7.3 ptsWriter: 7.3%Greg Abbott: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-7.1 ptsWriter: 7.1%Greg Abbott: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-5.2 ptsWriter: 5.2%Greg Abbott: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-3.3 ptsWriter: 3.3%Greg Abbott: 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.