OutKick87%

Jemele Hill says UFC event at the White House was 'performative patriotism' that lacked 'diversity' 73%

By Ian Miller0%

6/16/2026, 9:50:37 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 35 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Right Leaning Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 28.7% saturation with 246 hits. Analysis detected 1,921 faulty-reasoning hits from 856 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 65.4% and a BS Rank of 73% (5,639 of 20,371 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 72.30% of the article peer group.

Surprise, surprise, Jemele Hill did not like the UFC 250 Freedom event at the White House. 
Who'd have ever thought that someone whose entire career has been built on criticizing anything she can associate with the "right wing" would disapprove of an event hosted by Donald Trump? 
TMZ conducted an interview with Hill, who naturally claimed the UFC event did not represent "the best of America." 
"If this is supposed to represent the best of America, what about this represented the best of America?" 
she said. 
While giving some acknowledgment that it's "great to celebrate" veterans, which the event did, she claimed that the proudly patriotic pageantry and demonstrations celebrating America's 250th anniversary was "gaudy" and "narcissistic." 
And that, to her, it was more of a "Trump rally" than celebration for the country. 
"But when you consider the context of what this is supposed to mean, everything about this felt gaudy, it felt narcissistic, it was like Temu WrestleMania to me," she said. 
"And I don't know if that's the correct representation for America, and especially this sport in particular. 
Because look out in the crowd, did you see a lot of diversity in the crowd? 
This felt like a Trump rally. 
This didn't feel like a rally or celebration for America, something to bring everybody in." 
By now, everyone knows Hill's M.O.; any event hosted by Trump or a Republican is bad, any event hosted by a Democrat is good. 
The supposed lack of "diversity" in the crowd is not the "correct representation of America." 
Yet the lack of diversity in the modern NBA is something to be celebrated. 
TMZ's Harvey Levin pointed out that UFC is wildly popular with fans of all backgrounds, races, and ethnicities, to which Hill responded by saying it was "performative patriotism" that overshadowed people being "worried about gas prices." 
"And maybe some of this was also timing as well, because we're at a point now where people are worried about gas prices, they're worried about food, they're worried about basically surviving the day," she said. 
"And you have this ostentatious event of fighter jets and all of this sort of performative patriotism taking place, and it just felt out of place. 
This very much felt like a Trump rally. 
It didn't feel like something that was necessarily for everyone to enjoy and partake in..." 
Did she have similar complaints when the Biden administration hosted a Pride event on the White House lawn where a transgender individual took their shirt off to expose fake breasts? 
While people were struggling with gas prices and affordability and rampant inflation as a direct result of Biden's policies? 
Obviously not. 
Would she consider it "performative patriotism" to have a fly over of a major sporting event under, say, an Obama administration? 
When fly overs are a part of American sporting tradition, and are part of officially approved training missions anyway? 
Obviously not. 
To her though, because it's Trump, celebrating the country, our anniversary, and having a fun, popular sporting event in an incredible setting was an example of "rude" Americans. 
"...if you were considering what the perceptions of Americans are, you know, by other countries, you know, there's this sort of idea of the showboating, ostentatious, kind of rude American. 
If you were watching this, you would be thinking, you know what, they never beating the allegations," she said. 
Levin pointed out that it's impossible to represent everyone in the country with sports, because it's a huge country with disparate interests. 
But UFC would be among the "top draws" among sports with the widest appeal. 
She then compared it to the NFL and NBA, of course. 
Why? 
Because diversity. 
"I don't doubt its appeal, but it's certainly not the NFL," she said. 
"And it's not even the NBA, which is a very global sport. 
And we see sort of the diversity that it attracts to the game. 
And that's the thing. 
The fighters, certainly there is diversity among the fighters. 
But I think you'd be lying to yourself if you didn't say there's a feel and a texture that is very rooted in MAGA in this." 
The NBA is arguably the least diverse professional sport in the United States. 
It's just that the league is more representative in a direction Hill prefers, which is why she celebrates it. 
This really is a near-perfect example of the absurd politicized talking points Hill and left-wing sports media routinely engage in. 
UFC is immensely popular in the United States. 
The display was proudly patriotic, which is good actually, but patriotism only offends her and the left when it comes from a Republican president. 
Gas prices and affordability are an excuse in 2026, but not in 2023-2024, because the right party was in charge. 
Hosting an event on the White House is representative of the "showboating, ostentatious" American when it's Trump, but a Pride day with a topless transgender individual is a celebration. 
Ironically, Hill's criticism is the type of performative, ostentatious absurdity that she pretends to dislike. 
Welcome to left-wing sports media. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.9%Ian Miller: 11.4%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias10.9%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 1.3%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 12.4%Ian Miller: 3.7%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic12.4%This article: 2.0%Ian Miller: 0.9%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic2.0%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 1.1%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 5.8%Fox Nation: 3.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.3%Ian Miller: 10.7%Fox Nation: 12.0%Framing Effect8.3%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.6%Ian Miller: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 1.7%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.2%Ian Miller: 2.3%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias8.2%This article: 28.7%Ian Miller: 14.9%Fox Nation: 10.9%Negativity Bias28.7%This article: 5.0%Ian Miller: 1.5%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias5.0%This article: 9.1%Ian Miller: 3.7%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error9.1%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 7.4%Ian Miller: 4.2%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias7.4%This article: 2.8%Ian Miller: 2.7%Fox Nation: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.8%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 3.3%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 1.4%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.2%Ian Miller: 2.2%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias0.2%This article: 2.2%Ian Miller: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect2.2%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Ian Miller: 3.1%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem6.5%This article: 3.5%Ian Miller: 1.9%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man3.5%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 2.3%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 12.1%Ian Miller: 3.1%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma12.1%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.8%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.9%Ian Miller: 13.0%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization3.9%This article: 0.1%Ian Miller: 0.9%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring0.1%This article: 2.8%Ian Miller: 1.0%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon2.8%This article: 14.8%Ian Miller: 6.3%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion14.8%This article: 2.1%Ian Miller: 2.0%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question2.1%This article: 13.0%Ian Miller: 4.2%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)13.0%This article: 1.8%Ian Miller: 1.6%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque1.8%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 2.2%Ian Miller: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature2.2%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.2%Ian Miller: 2.1%Fox Nation: 2.3%Anecdotal2.2%This article: 3.0%Ian Miller: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman3.0%This article: 3.7%Ian Miller: 1.1%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.7%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 1.8%Ian Miller: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity1.8%This article: 2.3%Ian Miller: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading2.3%This article: 3.3%Ian Miller: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy3.3%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 1.3%Fox Nation: 1.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 1.8%Ian Miller: 1.1%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection1.8%This article: 11.4%Ian Miller: 16.5%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice11.4%This article: 2.3%Ian Miller: 0.8%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination2.3%This article: 1.6%Ian Miller: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias1.6%This article: 26.3%Ian Miller: 4.3%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias26.3%This article: 0.0%Ian Miller: 1.6%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

856 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers54%attributed speech390writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Jemele Hill • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageTMZ • 19 words • 100.0% coverageJemele Hill • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 31 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 30 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageHarvey Levin • 36 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 36 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 26 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageJemele Hill • 30 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 19 words • 0.0% coverageHarvey Levin • 22 words • 0.0% coverageHarvey Levin • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 13 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 13 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 4 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 9 words • 0.0% coverageJemele Hill • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

TMZ

100%flagged-word coverage
19 attributed words4.1% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+79.7 ptsWriter: 20.3%TMZ: 100.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning -57.7 ptsWriter: 57.7%TMZ: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-5.1 ptsWriter: 5.1%TMZ: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%TMZ: 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.