Ex-girlfriend of Graham Platner says he removed condoms without consent during sex ⁠86%

By Amy Brittain⁠0% Liz Goodwin⁠0% Amy B Wang⁠0%

7/7/2026, 8:57:27 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Ad Hominem, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 81 hits. Analysis detected 425 faulty-reasoning hits from 81 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 78.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠86% (2,966 of 21,176 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 86.00% of the article peer group.

An ex-girlfriend of embattled Senate candidate Graham Platner told The Washington Post that he repeatedly removed protection without her consent when they were having sex. 
Lyndsey Fifield, who said she dated Platner from 2013 to 2015 in D.C. and has previously accused him of physical abuse, said that she told Platner on multiple occasions that he had to wear condoms during sex because she was not on birth control. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 54.3%Amy Brittain: 7.7%The Washington Post: 3.8%Confirmation Bias54.3%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 4.9%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 45.7%Amy Brittain: 10.0%The Washington Post: 21.5%Framing Effect45.7%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 3.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 3.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 85.2%Amy Brittain: 20.6%The Washington Post: 18.5%Negativity Bias85.2%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 1.4%The Washington Post: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 11.6%The Washington Post: 1.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 54.3%Amy Brittain: 7.7%The Washington Post: 0.9%Ad Hominem54.3%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 30.9%Amy Brittain: 8.3%The Washington Post: 5.2%Appeal to Authority30.9%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 54.3%Amy Brittain: 7.7%The Washington Post: 5.9%Hasty Generalization54.3%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 6.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 4.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 100.0%Amy Brittain: 28.5%The Washington Post: 1.9%Anecdotal100.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 54.3%Amy Brittain: 13.0%The Washington Post: 4.8%Unattributed Quote54.3%This article: 14.8%Amy Brittain: 7.7%The Washington Post: 2.5%Quote-first Misdirection14.8%This article: 30.9%Amy Brittain: 8.8%The Washington Post: 15.2%Biased Writer Voice30.9%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 2.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 3.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Brittain: 0.0%The Washington Post: 1.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

81 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker54%attributed speech37writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageLyndsey Fifield • 44 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Lyndsey Fifield

100%flagged-word coverage
44 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Lyndsey Fifield: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-67.6 ptsWriter: 67.6%Lyndsey Fifield: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-32.4 ptsWriter: 32.4%Lyndsey Fifield: 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.