BS Summary: This article contains 9 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Hindsight Bias, and Recency Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 36% saturation with 98 hits. Analysis detected 370 faulty-reasoning hits from 272 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 75.9% and a BS Rank of 84% (3,500 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 84.00% of the article peer group.

A lot has changed during Sara Nelson’s time in Seattle government. 
She was a centrist outlier on a progressive city council when she was first elected in 2021. 
But the dynamics changed: Nelson became the center of power, and ended up running the show as council president, after a moderate slate of candidates swept the 2023 election. 
She helped oversee pandemic-era recovery, worked with two different mayoral administrations and two very different presidential administrations during her time on the council. 
Now - her time in office is coming to an end. 
Next month, there will be a new, more progressive representative in the citywide Position 9 seat that Nelson’s held the past four years. 
Nonprofit leader Dionne Foster will take Nelson’s place after winning by a wide margin of votes in November. 
Between passing a police contract, approving phase one of the city’s Comprehensive Plan, and putting forward a bill to change how consultants work with the city  Nelson has been busy during her last month in office. 
And last week she spent an hour with Soundside to reflect on her tenure and the direction Seattle politics is moving. 
GUESTS: 
- Sara Nelson, outgoing position 9 Seattle City Councilmember and City Council President 
RELATED LINKS: 
- Seattle passes new transparency law aimed at political consultants - Seattle Times 
- New Seattle Police contract includes pay boost, increased use of unarmed crisis responders - KUOW 
Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! 
If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/soundsidenotes 
Soundside is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.8%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 5.5%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 10.7%Libby Denkmann: 1.8%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias10.7%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 36.0%Libby Denkmann: 13.1%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect36.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.5%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 27.6%Libby Denkmann: 9.9%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect27.6%This article: 22.4%Libby Denkmann: 1.1%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias22.4%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 10.3%Libby Denkmann: 6.7%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias10.3%This article: 3.3%Libby Denkmann: 2.1%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion3.3%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 8.6%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 6.4%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.7%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 2.3%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.7%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.4%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 13.6%Libby Denkmann: 2.5%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias13.6%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.7%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 3.0%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 2.4%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.1%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.7%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 2.9%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 5.5%Libby Denkmann: 5.7%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority5.5%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 8.7%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 6.6%Libby Denkmann: 2.2%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon6.6%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.3%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.1%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 2.6%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.4%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 5.6%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.4%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.8%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%

272 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.