BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Optimism Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Self-Serving Bias as the most egregious example at 33.9% saturation with 154 hits. Analysis detected 1,191 faulty-reasoning hits from 456 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 87.8% and a BS Rank of 93% (1,640 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 92.50% of the article peer group.

St. Louis Comptroller Donna Baringer says the devastating May 16 tornado should spark more discussions about regional cooperation. 
“Anyone under 40 right now that comes into St. Louis says: ‘What is wrong with you people? 
Why are you so separated?’” 
And I tell everyone, that is why we're having an issue.” 
If St. Louis were part of St. Louis County, similar to how most of Kansas City is in Jackson County, it would not only be possible to have a larger tax base for expenses like an emergency management system  but also be eligible for other types of money, Baringer said Friday on the Politically Speaking Hour on St. Louis on the Air. 
“We would start qualifying for hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds, because that money is based on our population,” Baringer said. 
“And right now, the county alone and the city alone do not qualify for all the money.” 
Modernizing the comptroller’s office 
St. Louis went through a major political and governmental transition last year when Baringer's election ended Darlene Green’s 30-year tenure as city comptroller. 
Baringer said she’s overhauled the office that’s responsible for the city’s finances. 
That includes, she said, implementing technology to make quicker decisions. 
“There were people that were used to the way things were,” Baringer said. 
“And I came in and I wanted to update us, especially via technology. 
So I was paperless. 
And that was kind of difficult for some people at first, because they were used to printing emails.” 
Baringer said embracing technology especially helped during last year’s tornado. 
She said she was able to quickly sign off on some emergency contracts  even in the early morning hours. 
“So when we had the emergency contracts that needed to move the trees, do this at 2 o'clock in the morning, they could send it to me and I could DocuSign it. 
So it was immediate,” said Baringer, referring to an electronic signature system. 
Baringer said one of the challenges of recovering from the tornado is wading through complicated insurance situations and figuring out who owns the damaged property. 
She said there are some situations in which there are multiple generations living in a house but the owner of the property is deceased, which often requires courts to get involved. 
She also said the speed of the Federal Emergency Management Agency can be frustrating for residents and governmental officials. 
“FEMA goes slow as molasses, but you have to have everything correct,” Baringer said. 
“So I had accountants that did not take overtime but worked nights and weekends after that happened when everything was coming in. 
They were reviewing it to make sure it fell within the guidelines. 
Made sure we were tracking it.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.6%Jason Rosenbaum: 2.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Confirmation Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 22.2%Jason Rosenbaum: 2.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.7%Availability Heuristic22.2%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 2.2%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Hindsight Bias2.2%This article: 5.3%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias5.3%This article: 31.7%Jason Rosenbaum: 8.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.3%Framing Effect31.7%This article: 3.7%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Loss Aversion3.7%This article: 7.9%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Status Quo Bias7.9%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 24.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 3.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 4.8%Optimism Bias24.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 12.8%Jason Rosenbaum: 6.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.1%Negativity Bias12.8%This article: 33.9%Jason Rosenbaum: 3.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias33.9%This article: 4.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error4.0%This article: 4.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias4.0%This article: 15.4%Jason Rosenbaum: 3.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.2%In-Group Bias15.4%This article: 7.9%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias7.9%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 2.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.1%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Recency Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 3.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 3.7%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%False Dilemma3.7%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.2%Jason Rosenbaum: 4.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.7%Hasty Generalization11.2%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.7%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Bandwagon3.7%This article: 4.8%Jason Rosenbaum: 7.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion4.8%This article: 1.1%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Begging the Question1.1%This article: 8.6%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.6%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 18.9%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Composition/Division18.9%This article: 22.2%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.6%Anecdotal22.2%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.1%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.1%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 2.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jason Rosenbaum: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

454 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.