From tech to the trades: One laid off worker's big career pivot ⁠27%

By Joshua McNichols⁠0%

5/27/2026, 7:45:02 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Framing Effect, and Representativeness Heuristic, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 14.1% saturation with 28 hits. Analysis detected 252 faulty-reasoning hits from 199 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 38.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠27% (15,132 of 20,516 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 73.80% of the article peer group.

It’s a weird time to work in tech. 
Last year's tech layoffs in Washington state were the second highest in the country. 
That has some tech workers turning to fields they see as AI-proof. 
We sat down with Brett Burden, a laid off tech worker who did what a lot of people are advising: went into the trades. 
On today's episode, what’s it like to go from white collar to blue? 
And what can it tell us about where the workforce is headed? 
Coming up: Are you using AI agents? 
Do you have a task that you want an AI agent to complete for you? 
We'd love to hear from you. 
Give us a call at (206) 221-7158 and leave a voicemail. 
You can also email us at booming@kuow.org. 
Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! 
If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/boomingnotes. 
Booming is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network. 
Our editor is Carol Smith. 
Our producers are Lucy Soucek and Alec Cowan. 
Our hosts are Joshua McNichols and Monica Nickelsburg. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.0%Joshua McNichols: 1.8%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias6.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 1.7%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Joshua McNichols: 2.6%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic7.0%This article: 12.1%Joshua McNichols: 0.8%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic12.1%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.3%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Joshua McNichols: 2.0%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias6.0%This article: 12.6%Joshua McNichols: 7.5%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect12.6%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 2.2%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 1.2%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.5%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 5.4%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 2.8%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Joshua McNichols: 6.2%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias4.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 1.7%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.5%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.8%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.2%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 14.1%Joshua McNichols: 2.1%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect14.1%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.7%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.2%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.1%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.2%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.5%Joshua McNichols: 3.8%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority7.5%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 2.0%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 1.9%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.0%Joshua McNichols: 3.6%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization7.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 12.1%Joshua McNichols: 1.4%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon12.1%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 5.8%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 1.1%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 2.1%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 6.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division6.0%This article: 6.0%Joshua McNichols: 2.8%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal6.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 1.2%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.7%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.4%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.4%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.0%Joshua McNichols: 3.2%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice6.0%This article: 6.5%Joshua McNichols: 0.4%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination6.5%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.1%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joshua McNichols: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 13.6%Joshua McNichols: 1.0%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…13.6%

199 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker7.5%attributed speech184writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageKUOW • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

KUOW

100%flagged-word coverage
15 attributed words100% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -14.7 ptsWriter: 14.7%KUOW: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-7.1 ptsWriter: 7.1%KUOW: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-6.5 ptsWriter: 6.5%KUOW: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.