The Big Five | A comedy game show podcast with Tom Power & Donovan Woods | CBC Podcasts 55%

By CBC Podcasts0%

4/20/2026, 1:05:05 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Representativeness Heuristic as the most egregious example at 16.8% saturation with 66 hits. Analysis detected 618 faulty-reasoning hits from 394 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 53% and a BS Rank of 55% (9,873 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 54.90% of the article peer group.

Breaking news: there’s a new game show from CBC Podcasts! 
The Big Five podcast is here, and it's guaranteed to get you riled up about nothing in particular. 
Each episode, co-hosts Tom Power and Donovan Woods are joined by a celebrity guest so the group can debate the 'big' five of any given category: forms of cooked potato, guys named Paul, cartoon dogs, and so on. 
You know  the important stuff. 
Guests in this season include Vivek Shraya, Jordan Canning, William Prince, Lindsay Ell, Elamin Abdelmahmoud and more! 
And at the end of each segment, the debate is settled by a listener from across the country, who chimes in to decide once and for all, what is the Big Five. 
"Hanging out and chatting is basically my favourite thing, and, as you know, Tom’s a world-class chatter, so we’re having a good time. 
We used to play The Big Five just on our own, while out to dinner, or around a backyard fire. 
Now, I’m excited to share the fun on the CBC. 
It’s a great game for getting to know each other’s differing perspectives and our similarities. 
We’ve found that we leave with a much better understanding of our guests, even if we just talk about the big five breakfast cereals. 
It’s fun to have a little argument, especially about something that doesn’t really matter. 
Also, it’s nice to beat Tom at something every once in a while, because everybody’s always like, "ooooh he’s so cute and nice, blah blah"," Woods explained. 
"Donovan and I have been playing The Big Five for years: in the car, in group chats, at hockey games, at dinner, with our friends, with total strangers. 
After travelling and talking to Canadians all across the country, I've learned you can sometimes find out more about this country arguing about what each province calls a snowmobile or coloured pencils (they're leads!) 
than you would any other way. 
So I'm delighted Donovan asked me to be his co-host. 
It's also nice to not be the one asking all the questions for once. 
Plus I keep winning, which I didn't want to mention but here we are," Power claims. 
Find out for yourself! 
Listen and follow the show wherever you get your podcasts! 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.1%CBC Podcasts: 3.0%CBC: 2.6%Confirmation Bias6.1%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 12.9%CBC Podcasts: 5.4%CBC: 3.1%Availability Heuristic12.9%This article: 16.8%CBC Podcasts: 4.2%CBC: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic16.8%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.5%CBC Podcasts: 2.4%CBC: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias1.5%This article: 4.6%CBC Podcasts: 1.5%CBC: 4.2%Framing Effect4.6%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.6%CBC Podcasts: 3.7%CBC: 4.0%Optimism Bias9.6%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 6.9%CBC Podcasts: 1.7%CBC: 5.7%Negativity Bias6.9%This article: 14.5%CBC Podcasts: 8.2%CBC: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias14.5%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%CBC Podcasts: 2.9%CBC: 3.6%Halo Effect5.8%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.5%CBC Podcasts: 0.6%CBC: 1.2%Recency Bias2.5%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 6.9%CBC Podcasts: 3.4%CBC: 0.4%Ad Hominem6.9%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.2%CBC Podcasts: 2.5%CBC: 3.7%Appeal to Authority10.2%This article: 9.6%CBC Podcasts: 2.4%CBC: 1.3%False Dilemma9.6%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.6%CBC Podcasts: 11.0%CBC: 4.8%Hasty Generalization8.6%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.1%CBC Podcasts: 2.2%CBC: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion4.1%This article: 4.6%CBC Podcasts: 1.1%CBC: 0.6%Begging the Question4.6%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 9.9%CBC Podcasts: 10.7%CBC: 3.3%Anecdotal9.9%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.6%CBC Podcasts: 0.9%CBC: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.6%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.8%CBC Podcasts: 1.5%CBC: 1.1%Unattributed Quote5.8%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 2.7%CBC: 4.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 2.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBC Podcasts: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.4%CBC Podcasts: 15.0%CBC: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…12.4%

394 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers34%attributed speech259writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDonovan Woods • 27 words • 0.0% coverageTom Power • 28 words • 0.0% coverageTom Power • 34 words • 0.0% coverageTom Power • 6 words • 0.0% coverageTom Power • 10 words • 0.0% coverageTom Power • 14 words • 0.0% coverageTom Power • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donovan Woods

100%flagged-word coverage
27 attributed words20% of attributed speech71% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -18.9 ptsWriter: 18.9%Donovan Woods: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-8.9 ptsWriter: 8.9%Donovan Woods: 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.