Bengals practice at Paycor Stadium delayed due to severe weather ⁠7%

By Shelby Dermer⁠3%

8/7/2026, 3:14:13 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 5 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Recency Bias, and Self-Serving Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 25.4% saturation with 31 hits. Analysis detected 81 faulty-reasoning hits from 122 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 15.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠7% (28,302 of 30,213 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 93.70% of the article peer group.

The Cincinnati Bengals training camp practice inside Paycor Stadium on Friday, Aug. 7 has been delayed due to inclement weather. 
There was a steady downpour inside Paycor Stadium moments ago and both of the venue's jumbotrons feature severe weather warnings urging fans to remain n the nearest concourse, ramp or stairway. 
Update (7:04 p.m.): Due to severe weather, the earliest the Bengals will move practice inside Paycor Stadium is 7:30 p.m. 
Update (7:15 p.m.): The lower bowl of Paycor Stadium is now open and fans rushed to their seats. 
Some players, including Dexter Lawrence, Barrett Carter, Boye Mafe and Demetrius Knight Jr. have entered the field. 
The Enquirer will update this story. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.5%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 16.4%Shelby Dermer: 4.1%The Enquirer: 1.3%Anchoring Bias16.4%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.8%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.4%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.7%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.3%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 25.4%Shelby Dermer: 6.4%The Enquirer: 4.0%Negativity Bias25.4%This article: 4.9%Shelby Dermer: 1.2%The Enquirer: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 14.8%Shelby Dermer: 3.7%The Enquirer: 0.7%Recency Bias14.8%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.7%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 1.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Shelby Dermer: 0.0%The Enquirer: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Shelby Dermer: 1.2%The Enquirer: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.9%

122 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker4.9%attributed speech116writer words
Selected voice

The Enquirer

100%flagged-word coverage
6 attributed words100% of attributed speech59% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%The Enquirer: 100.0%100.0%

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.