What’s more powerful than the lure of digital devices? Kids 6%

By Stefano Esposito8%

7/13/2026, 3:30:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Hasty Generalization, and Halo Effect, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 15.1% saturation with 114 hits. Analysis detected 414 faulty-reasoning hits from 756 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 20.8% and a BS Rank of 6% (20,778 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 94.90% of the article peer group.

Every child needs a dog. 
When I was a boy growing up in London, my parents bought a German shepherd puppy. 
I was 8 at the time, and 50 years later, I still remember sitting at my school desk, literally aching to be home with “Timber,” our 2-month-old pup. 
The need is greater now. 
The other day, after a downpour, I spotted a rainbow arcing across the sky  the whole thing, uninterrupted. 
“Boys, look! 
Isn’t that incredible?” 
I called out to Lucca, 14, and Matteo, 8, in the backseat of our car. 
They raised their heads for a split second, utterly unfazed, and then returned to their screens. 
We limit screen time  we really do  but sometimes it feels like nothing, not a swooping hawk, the Hancock Tower cloaked in mist or even Mother Nature’s most vivid color palette can compete with the digital fireworks crackling on the screens in my children’s hands. 
Which, in large part, is how we found ourselves driving on the Fourth of July to a Labrador breeder in Bourbon, a tiny town about an hour southwest of St. 
Louis, and just north of the Mark Twain National Forest. 
I know, there are hundreds of homeless dogs in Chicago right now, all yelping to be adopted. 
In my defense, all of our previous pets have come from shelters. 
But I’m stubborn. 
I wanted to recreate my childhood experience for my boys. 
My parents drove about an hour southwest of London to a breeder in Guilford, England. 
In those days, many people in Britain still called the German shepherd breed “Alsatian,” because of a lingering anti-German sentiment. 
Chicago Sun-Times reporter Stefano Esposito addresses his new black Labrador puppy, Bourbon, outside his home in Chicago. 
Parts of this image have been blurred to protect the subject’s/reporter’s information. 
Jim Kelly 
I didn’t care about any of that. 
The breeder’s home was pure puppy pandemonium: dogs hanging out of windows, dogs lying on sofas, dogs tearing up what few tufts of grass remained in the front yard. 
And then there was Timber, the sweetest little bundle of black-and-tan fluff you have ever seen. 
The breeder handed him over, and my mother held him against her chest for the entire ride back home to London. 
I wanted a German shepherd this time, but my wife and children overruled me. 
Sorry, Dad, my kids said, we’re getting a black Lab. 
I found a breeder, Amy O’Dell , in Missouri, who seemed thoughtful, kind and with reasonably priced puppies. 
She also gives a $300 discount for teachers, of which my wife is one. 
We reached Bourbon about lunchtime July 5. 
With the excitement building, we stopped for lunch, knowing we’d soon have our hands full. 
Bourbon Saloon on Pine Street feels like something out of a movie (think “Steel Magnolias” or “Fried Green Tomatoes”). 
It is jammed floor to ceiling with quirky country knickknacks, multiple cardboard cutouts of Dolly Parton and even a guy in a Stetson strumming a guitar. 
I dialed Amy, stepping outside to make myself heard over the din of chatting customers. 
“I’m sorry, but we’re running a bit late. 
We’ve stopped off at Bourbon Saloon,” I said. 
“Don’t worry,” Amy said. 
“I know the place. 
I’ll bring the puppy to you there.” 
Not 10 minutes later, a middle-aged blonde woman arrived cradling a chubby and trembling black lab puppy. 
My children  even Lucca, my 14-year-old, who on principle refuses to smile or to allow me to hug him in public  dissolved into fits of giggles and gushing baby talk over this tiny, helpless creature. 
“He’s adorable  and very chubby,” Lucca said. 
“He’s almost as big as Matteo!” 
A Saloon customer approached and asked if she could hold the puppy. 
Of course, we said. 
As she snuggled with our newest family member, she asked if we’d picked a name. 
Not yet, we said. 
“How about Bourbon, after the town where you bought him?” 
she suggested. 
And before we could raise an objection, she tickled the puppy’s chin, cooing: “Hello Bourbon , what a sweet puppy you are.” 
Fortunately, my family was on board. 
A few minutes later, we climbed into our mini-SUV, with my wife, Tracy, holding Bourbon against her chest as we began the six-hour drive back to Chicago. 
And there were my children, begging  yes, begging  not for their electronic devices but to be the first to play with this face-licking, tail-wagging, shoe-gnawing, utterly irresistible puppy. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.1%Stefano Esposito: 2.8%WBEZ: 2.0%Confirmation Bias15.1%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%Stefano Esposito: 2.1%WBEZ: 2.6%Availability Heuristic5.8%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.2%WBEZ: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 1.0%WBEZ: 0.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 7.4%Stefano Esposito: 4.2%WBEZ: 4.2%Framing Effect7.4%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.4%WBEZ: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.6%WBEZ: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%Stefano Esposito: 0.3%WBEZ: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect1.3%This article: 4.0%Stefano Esposito: 2.6%WBEZ: 2.5%Optimism Bias4.0%This article: 0.7%Stefano Esposito: 1.4%WBEZ: 0.9%Pessimism Bias0.7%This article: 2.1%Stefano Esposito: 3.3%WBEZ: 5.2%Negativity Bias2.1%This article: 1.6%Stefano Esposito: 0.9%WBEZ: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias1.6%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.3%WBEZ: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.3%WBEZ: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Stefano Esposito: 2.0%WBEZ: 2.6%Halo Effect6.2%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 1.3%WBEZ: 1.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.1%WBEZ: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 2.3%WBEZ: 3.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 2.7%WBEZ: 0.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 1.1%WBEZ: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.6%WBEZ: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.9%Stefano Esposito: 3.1%WBEZ: 3.0%Hasty Generalization6.9%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 2.7%WBEZ: 4.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.4%WBEZ: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.4%WBEZ: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 1.6%WBEZ: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.7%WBEZ: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 3.7%Stefano Esposito: 2.8%WBEZ: 2.3%Anecdotal3.7%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.4%WBEZ: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.9%WBEZ: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.6%WBEZ: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 3.0%WBEZ: 3.6%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.1%WBEZ: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stefano Esposito: 0.0%WBEZ: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

756 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers3.8%attributed speech727writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 47 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageAmy O'Dell • 4 words • 0.0% coverageAmy O'Dell • 4 words • 0.0% coverageAmy O'Dell • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageLucca • 8 words • 0.0% coverageLucca • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Amy O'Dell

0%flagged-word coverage
15 attributed words52% of attributed speech36% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

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.