How America was Shaped by Multilevel Marketing⁠71%

12/16/2025, 11:27:52 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Hasty Generalization, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 38.4% saturation with 78 hits. Analysis detected 250 faulty-reasoning hits from 203 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 63.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠71% (6,349 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 71.00% of the article peer group.

How America was Shaped by Multilevel Marketing 
Multilevel marketing is something of an American tradition. 
Journalist Bridget Read tells the story of the money-making schemes that continue to ensnare people today. 
Multilevel marketing as we know it dates back to the 1940s, with a vitamin company called Nutrilite. 
If you worked for Nutrilite, you didn’t just sell vitamins — you were supposed to recruit other salespeople to buy your supply of vitamins and sell it for you. 
They, in turn, could do the same. 
The pyramid scheme was born. 
Since then, this tactic has made a very small number of people extremely rich, and made a far, far larger amount of people hemorrhage money. 
Why do people keep falling for it? 
Journalist Bridget Read says it has something to do with the very American idea of being your own boss. 
She’s joining us to talk about how pyramid schemes defined the nation. 
GUEST — 
Bridget Read | Features writer for New York Magazine. 
Her book is called “Little Bosses Everywhere: How the Pyramid Scheme Shaped America.” 
Amazon | Bookshop 
Airdate: Weds., July 30, 2025, at 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. 
Rebroadcast: Thurs., Dec. 18, 2025, at 9 a.m. and Sat., Dec. 20, 2025 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias3.9%This article: 12.3%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic12.3%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 38.4%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect38.4%This article: 3.4%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error3.4%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 3.4%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 20.2%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias20.2%This article: 0.0%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 9.4%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic9.4%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 9.4%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority9.4%This article: 0.0%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.9%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon3.9%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.5%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy2.5%This article: 12.3%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization12.3%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%

203 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.