Yay books! Soundside's 2025 in letters⁠89%

By Libby Denkmann⁠0% Gabrielle Healy⁠0%

12/18/2025, 11:45:01 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 60.4% saturation with 93 hits. Analysis detected 509 faulty-reasoning hits from 149 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 81.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠89% (2,587 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 88.20% of the article peer group.

There are only a few weeks left in 2025. 
That means for those of you who resolved, at the beginning of the year, to do more reading — it's crunch time. 
Did you actually put down your phone long enough to get through a book this year? 
It's not too late. 
Many great books came out this year. 
If you need suggestions for something to read or to give to someone who really ought to be reading more, we've got you covered. 
GUESTS: 
Misha Stone, reader services librarian, Seattle Public Library 
Spencer Ruchti, author events manager, Third Place Books 
RELATED LINKS: 
Our list of books we loved! Yes, it's a Google Doc. 
Yes, it's a Google Doc. 
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: 10.4%Libby Denkmann: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias10.4%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.8%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Libby Denkmann: 5.5%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic4.5%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.8%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 60.4%Libby Denkmann: 13.1%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect60.4%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.5%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 27.3%Libby Denkmann: 9.9%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect27.3%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.1%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 40.9%Libby Denkmann: 6.7%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias40.9%This article: 20.1%Libby Denkmann: 2.1%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion20.1%This article: 26.0%Libby Denkmann: 8.6%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias26.0%This article: 14.3%Libby Denkmann: 6.4%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias14.3%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: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 2.5%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%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: 3.2%Libby Denkmann: 2.4%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias3.2%This article: 14.3%Libby Denkmann: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect14.3%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: 7.1%Libby Denkmann: 2.9%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal7.1%This article: 35.7%Libby Denkmann: 5.7%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority35.7%This article: 29.9%Libby Denkmann: 8.7%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion29.9%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Libby Denkmann: 2.2%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 26.0%Libby Denkmann: 1.3%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question26.0%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: 10.4%Libby Denkmann: 2.6%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma10.4%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%

154 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.