BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias, Bandwagon, and Halo Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 75.8% saturation with 75 hits. Analysis detected 255 faulty-reasoning hits from 99 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 82.3% and a BS Rank of 89% (2,408 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 89.00% of the article peer group.

The United States Campaign to Ban Landmines is a coalition of non-governmental organizations working to ensure that the U.S. comprehensively prohibits antipersonnel mines--by banning their use in Korea--and joins the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, as more than 160 nations have done. 
It is the national affiliate of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), founded in New York in 1992 and recipient of the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate together with former ICBL coordinator Ms. 
Jody Williams of Vermont. 
We also call for sustained U.S. government financial support for mine clearance and victim assistance. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.2%Common Dreams: 7.9%Confirmation Bias15.2%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 5.0%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 17.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 2.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 20.6%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 2.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 41.4%Common Dreams: 3.8%In-Group Bias41.4%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 34.3%Common Dreams: 1.5%Halo Effect34.3%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.5%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 6.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 34.3%Common Dreams: 5.6%Appeal to Authority34.3%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 3.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 3.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 8.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 41.4%Common Dreams: 2.2%Bandwagon41.4%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 18.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 3.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 4.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 2.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 2.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 75.8%Common Dreams: 17.2%Biased Writer Voice75.8%This article: 15.2%Common Dreams: 8.6%Indoctrination15.2%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 17.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Common Dreams: 1.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

99 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker4.0%attributed speech95writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageJody Williams • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jody Williams

0%flagged-word coverage
4 attributed words100% of attributed speech95% writer coverage
0%40.0%80.0%Biased Writer Voice-78.9 ptsWriter: 78.9%Jody Williams: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-15.8 ptsWriter: 15.8%Jody Williams: 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.