OutKick87%

Dodgers break out annual Pride Night hats, drawing brutal reactions 79%

By Zach Dean87%

6/6/2026, 1:09:34 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Negativity Bias, and Unattributed Quote, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 64.8% saturation with 333 hits. Analysis detected 1,604 faulty-reasoning hits from 514 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 70.7% and a BS Rank of 79% (4,415 of 20,368 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 78.30% of the article peer group.

It's June, which means the baseball world will be on edge for the next 25 days or so. 
A tradition unlike any other in this country! 
For those who don't know (and that's none of you, because it's everywhere), June is Pride Month. 
Haven't you heard?! 
You know in October when the NFL wears pink for a month? 
That's June in Major League Baseball, except it's rainbow hats and social media posts. 
And, of course, the Texas Rangers angering half the country because they don't do any of it. 
ZERO BS. 
JUST DAKICH. 
TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. 
DOWNLOAD NOW! 
They're having a "Faith & Family Night" June 18 instead, for those wondering. 
Incredible. 
Most based team in America, by a wide margin. 
On the other side of the aisle, you have the Los Angeles Dodgers. 
Just to keep things balanced, they step up every year and really lean into things this month. 
Don't forget, this was the team that hosted anti-Catholic drag nuns three years ago during this very month. 
While they didn't do that Friday night, the Dodgers did break out some pride hats for their game against the Angels. 
Naturally, MLB fans were QUICK to notice: 
Blake Treinen gets the win in his normal work attire 
I could go on and on. 
Seriously. 
The comments are endless, and they are, for the most part, brutal. 
Again, we do this every year with the Dodgers. 
I'm numb to it at this point. 
I also expect nothing less from any franchise located in California. 
DODGERS' WORLD SERIES HERO WILL SMITH DESCRIBES TEAM'S MINDSET DURING DRAMATIC VICTORY OVER BLUE JAYS 
Is it a little much? 
Maybe. 
You wanna make a social media post? 
That's probably fine. 
But now we're having players wear the gear on during games? 
I don't know. 
Clayton Kershaw famously wrote a Bible verse next to his pride hat when he was on the team. 
Remember this? 
Amazing: 
That was one year ago! 
Man, time flies. 
Anyway, we nearly had something similar last night with reliever Blake Treinen, who entered the game in the top of the ninth looking like it was just another day at the ballpark: 
Treinen, by the way, is deeply religious and has been extremely open about his relationship with God. 
Don't forget, last fall he honored Charlie Kirk with his hat, which went over about as well as you'd expect. 
No idea if that played a role in this, or if he simply grabbed the wrong hat, but you can probably piece the two together. 
Regardless, Treinen threw just one pitch, got out of the jam, and then Freddie Freeman walked it off in the bottom of the ninth. 
See? 
How can you not be romantic about baseball?! 
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP 
As for the Dodgers' yearly Pride Night ... like I said, I'm numb to it at this point. 
At least they didn't have drag nuns this time. 
There is still a lot of June left, though. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.4%Zach Dean: 3.9%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias7.4%This article: 6.2%Zach Dean: 0.7%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias6.2%This article: 14.2%Zach Dean: 4.9%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic14.2%This article: 2.7%Zach Dean: 0.9%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic2.7%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.2%Zach Dean: 2.8%Fox Nation: 3.1%Overconfidence Bias1.2%This article: 15.6%Zach Dean: 4.9%Fox Nation: 12.0%Framing Effect15.6%This article: 1.8%Zach Dean: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion1.8%This article: 1.8%Zach Dean: 1.0%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias1.8%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.1%Zach Dean: 2.1%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias2.1%This article: 7.4%Zach Dean: 1.9%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias7.4%This article: 19.6%Zach Dean: 11.4%Fox Nation: 10.9%Negativity Bias19.6%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 1.1%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Zach Dean: 1.8%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error3.3%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%Zach Dean: 2.1%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias9.1%This article: 2.1%Zach Dean: 1.2%Fox Nation: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.1%This article: 0.4%Zach Dean: 4.3%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect0.4%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 16.3%Zach Dean: 2.8%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias16.3%This article: 1.0%Zach Dean: 0.8%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect1.0%This article: 4.9%Zach Dean: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 3.8%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 1.0%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 2.0%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 7.4%Zach Dean: 1.6%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma7.4%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.7%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 3.3%Zach Dean: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning3.3%This article: 25.5%Zach Dean: 9.0%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization25.5%This article: 6.6%Zach Dean: 1.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring6.6%This article: 4.7%Zach Dean: 1.7%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon4.7%This article: 9.1%Zach Dean: 7.2%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion9.1%This article: 0.2%Zach Dean: 0.6%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question0.2%This article: 8.4%Zach Dean: 2.4%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.4%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 13.6%Zach Dean: 3.5%Fox Nation: 2.3%Anecdotal13.6%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.2%Zach Dean: 2.2%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.2%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.6%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 16.7%Zach Dean: 2.3%Fox Nation: 1.7%Unattributed Quote16.7%This article: 1.9%Zach Dean: 1.1%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection1.9%This article: 64.8%Zach Dean: 19.6%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice64.8%This article: 8.2%Zach Dean: 2.4%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination8.2%This article: 0.0%Zach Dean: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 13.2%Zach Dean: 2.3%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias13.2%This article: 4.1%Zach Dean: 1.9%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.1%

514 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers6.2%attributed speech482writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageTexas Rangers • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWill Smith • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Texas Rangers

100%flagged-word coverage
17 attributed words53% of attributed speech94% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning +89.4 ptsWriter: 10.6%Texas Rangers: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+34.4 ptsWriter: 65.6%Texas Rangers: 100.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote-17.8 ptsWriter: 17.8%Texas Rangers: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-8.7 ptsWriter: 8.7%Texas Rangers: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -4.4 ptsWriter: 4.4%Texas Rangers: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-2.1 ptsWriter: 2.1%Texas Rangers: 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.