News Wrap: Gulf Coast prepares for Tropical Storm Bertha ⁠64%

By Cascade PBS Staff⁠49%

7/22/2026, 12:45:53 AM

Keywords: Pbs News Hour

BS Summary: This article contains 2 faulty reasoning types, including Recency Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 88% saturation with 66 hits. Analysis detected 132 faulty-reasoning hits from 75 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 58.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠64% (7,526 of 20,498 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 63.30% of the article peer group.

In our news wrap Tuesday, millions along the Gulf Coast are bracing for impacts from Tropical Storm Bertha, Ukrainian President Zelenskyy fired the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces in the latest shake-up of his top military ranks and New Jersey's governor said more than 6,000 noncitizens were registered to vote in the state in 2023 and 2024 and fewer than 400 of those cast a ballot. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.8%Cascade PBS: 3.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 1.1%Cascade PBS: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 2.9%Cascade PBS: 5.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 1.2%Cascade PBS: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 88.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 15.5%Cascade PBS: 16.8%Framing Effect88.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.9%Cascade PBS: 0.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 2.1%Cascade PBS: 2.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 15.7%Cascade PBS: 20.8%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 9.3%Cascade PBS: 7.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 88.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 6.5%Cascade PBS: 4.9%Recency Bias88.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 8.7%Cascade PBS: 8.5%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 1.5%Cascade PBS: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 5.0%Cascade PBS: 6.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 2.7%Cascade PBS: 2.2%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 1.6%Cascade PBS: 1.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 2.0%Cascade PBS: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.4%Cascade PBS: 1.1%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 1.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 6.4%Cascade PBS: 9.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 2.7%Cascade PBS: 3.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.9%Cascade PBS: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 11.7%Cascade PBS: 9.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 3.3%Cascade PBS: 2.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 0.0%Cascade PBS: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cascade PBS Staff: 1.2%Cascade PBS: 1.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

75 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.