An Environmental Horror Story About Great Salt Lake86%

1/20/2026, 8:18:09 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Politically Left Leaning Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 74.1% saturation with 126 hits. Analysis detected 625 faulty-reasoning hits from 170 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 78.5% and a BS Rank of 86% (3,069 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 86.00% of the article peer group.

In a new documentary premiering at Sundance, local filmmaker Abby Ellis follows two scientists and a government official fighting to stave off environmental disaster and save Great Salt Lake. 
While the lake is certainly a character in Ellis’ film, for her, the story is really about three people whose lives, she says, are inseparable from the lake’s fate. 
As microbiologist Bonnie Baxter, environmental ecologist Ben Abbot and Great Salt Lake Commissioner Brian Steed each come to realize, the lives and livelihoods of millions are tied to the lake. 
In their own ways, Baxter, Abbot and Steed are working to save their home from disaster, which leads to the question at the heart of Ellis’ film: How far would you go if you faced a similar threat? 
Ellis joins us to talk about her film. 
It’s called “The Lake.” 
GUEST - 
Abby Ellis | She directed the documentary “The Lake.” 
It premieres at the Sundance Film Festival on January 22nd, 2026. 
You can get more information here (https://festival.sundance.org/program/film/6932fa971a55358d8591affd). 
Original Airdate: 01/22/26 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 74.1%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect74.1%This article: 22.4%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion22.4%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 22.4%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias22.4%This article: 17.1%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias17.1%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 17.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority17.6%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 39.4%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion39.4%This article: 22.4%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question22.4%This article: 0.0%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 74.1%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice74.1%This article: 74.1%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias74.1%This article: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.1%

170 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.