Breitbart81%

MLB Accused of ‘Rigging’ Home Run Derby with Early Netflix Graphic 48%

By Warner Todd Huston56%

7/14/2026, 10:13:34 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Availability Heuristic, and Appeal to Emotion, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 36.7% saturation with 76 hits. Analysis detected 589 faulty-reasoning hits from 207 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.9% and a BS Rank of 48% (11,546 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 52.80% of the article peer group.

Major League Baseball became the target of conspiracy theories and claims it had rigged the 2026 Home Run Derby on Monday when a graphic on Netflix labeled Jordan Walker the winner before the event was even done. 
The Netflix airing of the derby featured a graphic during the last round between Walker and Philadelphia Phillies slugger Kyle Schwarber that labeled Walker as the “2026 T-Mobile Home Run Derby Champion.” 
Naturally, that sent conspiracy-minded fans to social media to proclaim that the event was rigged. 
Walker did win, of course, with a come-behind performance that surprised Schwarber, who looked like the winner right up until that last round. 
Schwarber rocketed 11 of his first 15 swings and looked to be the odds-on favorite to win the derby. 
But by the time Walker stepped up in that final round, his six homers in a row were enough to top the Phillies star’s final count with 12 to Schwarber’s 11. 
But with the mistaken graphic hitting the screen before the derby was actually finished, many a fan screamed that the whole thing was rigged. 
Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: Facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston, Truth Social @WarnerToddHuston, or at X/Twitter @WTHuston 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 36.7%Warner Todd Huston: 6.6%Breitbart: 4.5%Confirmation Bias36.7%This article: 9.2%Warner Todd Huston: 2.9%Breitbart: 0.6%Anchoring Bias9.2%This article: 25.1%Warner Todd Huston: 8.7%Breitbart: 3.9%Availability Heuristic25.1%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 11.1%Warner Todd Huston: 1.9%Breitbart: 0.7%Hindsight Bias11.1%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 3.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 23.2%Warner Todd Huston: 13.8%Breitbart: 11.9%Framing Effect23.2%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.9%Breitbart: 3.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.6%Breitbart: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 16.9%Warner Todd Huston: 18.1%Breitbart: 9.7%Negativity Bias16.9%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.6%Breitbart: 2.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 1.1%Breitbart: 1.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 2.0%Breitbart: 4.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 3.4%Breitbart: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.2%Breitbart: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.6%Warner Todd Huston: 1.8%Breitbart: 1.8%Recency Bias11.6%This article: 11.1%Warner Todd Huston: 0.6%Breitbart: 0.6%Primacy Effect11.1%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 2.2%Breitbart: 2.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 1.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 4.6%Breitbart: 4.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 2.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 17.9%Warner Todd Huston: 4.5%Breitbart: 7.9%Hasty Generalization17.9%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.4%Breitbart: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 7.2%Warner Todd Huston: 1.5%Breitbart: 1.2%Bandwagon7.2%This article: 24.2%Warner Todd Huston: 6.1%Breitbart: 8.8%Appeal to Emotion24.2%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 1.3%Breitbart: 1.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 29.5%Warner Todd Huston: 3.4%Breitbart: 3.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)29.5%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 11.6%Warner Todd Huston: 1.5%Breitbart: 1.0%Burden of Proof11.6%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 2.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.6%Breitbart: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 1.1%Breitbart: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.2%Breitbart: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 1.0%Breitbart: 2.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 17.9%Warner Todd Huston: 8.0%Breitbart: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection17.9%This article: 24.2%Warner Todd Huston: 8.9%Breitbart: 7.8%Biased Writer Voice24.2%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 3.0%Breitbart: 1.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Warner Todd Huston: 7.8%Breitbart: 7.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 7.2%Warner Todd Huston: 3.9%Breitbart: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.2%

207 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers45%attributed speech113writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageMajor League Baseball • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageJordan Walker • 23 words • 0.0% coverageKyle Schwarber • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWarner Todd Huston • 15 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Major League Baseball

100%flagged-word coverage
37 attributed words39% of attributed speech44% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Major League Baseball: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-44.2 ptsWriter: 44.2%Major League Baseball: 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.