Vox50%

The next Strait of Hormuz 80%

By Caitlin Dewey77%

7/15/2026, 9:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Biased Writer Voice, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.9% saturation with 112 hits. Analysis detected 1,230 faulty-reasoning hits from 511 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 71% and a BS Rank of 80% (4,551 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 79.20% of the article peer group.

This story appeared in&nbsp;Today, Explained,&nbsp;a daily newsletter that helps you understand the most compelling news and stories of the day. <a href="https://www.vox.com/today-explained-newsletter" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Subscribe here</a>. 
If I had a nickel for every time President Donald Trump backtracked or changed course on Iran, I’d have…well, at least enough money for a gallon of <a href="https://gasprices.aaa.com/">$3.89 gas</a>. 
Trump has threatened attacks and postponed them. 
He’s praised Iran’s leaders in one breath and panned them as “scum” in the next. 
The latest about-face played out Tuesday morning, when Trump canceled a controversial, short-lived plan to charge fees on ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway at the heart of this whole mess. 
It’s incredibly easy to get lost in all the back-and-forth. 
(Even as I write this, the United States is still sanctioning Iranian oil sales, preventing ships <a href="https://x.com/CENTCOM/status/2077382758486200757? 
s=20">from docking</a> at Iranian ports, and bombarding the country with <a href="https://x.com/CENTCOM/status/2077338021733478617? 
s=20">missile strikes</a>.) 
But if you zoom out far enough, a clear narrative <em>does</em> emerge: Whatever the war might’ve been about in the beginning, it’s now very clearly <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/494968/iran-us-strait-hormuz">a <em>strait</em>-up tug-of-war for control of the Strait of Hormuz</a>. 
The strait is the world’s most important energy chokepoint: A fifth of the world’s oil and gas normally passes through it. 
And now that Iran has shown it can shut down that traffic, whoever controls the strait will gain both a major potential revenue source and a powerful economic weapon. 
These waterways run the world &nbsp; 
The Strait of Hormuz is what’s known as a maritime chokepoint<em>: </em>a narrow waterway that handles an outsized share of global trade. 
Your daily life is almost definitely filled with and fueled by goods that pass through these channels. 
But you may never have occasion to consciously think about them until something  like a war or <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/24/how-a-container-ship-blocked-the-suez-canal-visual-guide">a stuck container ship</a>  gets in the way. 
Here are a few of the other heavyweights (click to see <a href="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ZvwoG/2/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">a larger version here</a>): 
One link for later 
➨&nbsp;Health trackers offer a ton of data. 
And much of it is only good for raising your stress! 
Instead of obsessing over metrics like your daily resting heart rate or HRV, <a href="https://www.vox.com/good-medicine-newsletter/494789/apple-watch-oura-ring-fitbit-health-tracker-data">focus on the long-term trends</a>. 
And don’t forget to pay attention to how you<em> actually</em> feel, as opposed to deferring to what your wearable says. 
Before you go… 
* Did you know…that <a href="https://www.vox.com/advice/495193/singing-lamentation-grief-despair">singing with a group of other people</a> raises your oxytocin levels? 
This experiment was conducted in a choir rehearsal, but I’m personally and self-servingly gonna assume it applies to karaoke, as well. 
* Today’s trivia: Caribbean and Indian cooking traditions combined to yield what delicious wrap-style sandwich? 
(You can find this and other brain puzzles in Vox’s daily crossword. 
Look for the answer in tomorrow’s edition.) 
* Yesterday’s trivia: Yesterday we asked you for the bizarre human nickname that San Franciscans give their heavy summer fog. 
That would be Karl, a reference to the 2003 film <em>Big Fish</em>. 
The gag <a href="https://www.kqed.org/news/11682057/how-the-bay-areas-fog-came-to-be-named-karl">started on social media</a>. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.0%Caitlin Dewey: 2.7%Vox: 4.5%Confirmation Bias7.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Caitlin Dewey: 4.7%Vox: 3.0%Availability Heuristic8.6%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 1.2%Vox: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.7%Vox: 1.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 14.9%Caitlin Dewey: 1.9%Vox: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias14.9%This article: 16.6%Caitlin Dewey: 7.6%Vox: 5.9%Framing Effect16.6%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.3%Vox: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 1.4%Caitlin Dewey: 1.0%Vox: 0.4%Status Quo Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.3%Caitlin Dewey: 1.0%Vox: 2.0%Optimism Bias3.3%This article: 5.7%Caitlin Dewey: 1.8%Vox: 2.3%Pessimism Bias5.7%This article: 21.9%Caitlin Dewey: 8.5%Vox: 6.7%Negativity Bias21.9%This article: 4.1%Caitlin Dewey: 0.9%Vox: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.8%Vox: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 3.9%Caitlin Dewey: 0.2%Vox: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.2%Vox: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 1.0%Vox: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 2.7%Vox: 1.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 12.5%Caitlin Dewey: 2.6%Vox: 1.3%Recency Bias12.5%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 1.0%Vox: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.6%Vox: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.8%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.1%Caitlin Dewey: 3.1%Vox: 3.2%Appeal to Authority4.1%This article: 11.0%Caitlin Dewey: 2.3%Vox: 2.0%False Dilemma11.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 1.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.4%Caitlin Dewey: 7.9%Vox: 6.2%Hasty Generalization16.4%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.2%Vox: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.6%Vox: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.3%Caitlin Dewey: 4.6%Vox: 3.9%Appeal to Emotion4.3%This article: 7.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.4%Vox: 0.9%Begging the Question7.0%This article: 5.7%Caitlin Dewey: 2.0%Vox: 3.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.7%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.2%Vox: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.8%Vox: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 4.3%Caitlin Dewey: 0.4%Vox: 0.4%Composition/Division4.3%This article: 11.4%Caitlin Dewey: 4.2%Vox: 2.2%Anecdotal11.4%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.7%Caitlin Dewey: 3.4%Vox: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.7%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.1%Vox: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 15.9%Caitlin Dewey: 4.1%Vox: 1.8%Unattributed Quote15.9%This article: 6.1%Caitlin Dewey: 1.8%Vox: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection6.1%This article: 19.6%Caitlin Dewey: 15.8%Vox: 8.8%Biased Writer Voice19.6%This article: 7.6%Caitlin Dewey: 3.6%Vox: 1.6%Indoctrination7.6%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 1.9%Vox: 2.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Dewey: 0.0%Vox: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 20.7%Caitlin Dewey: 5.3%Vox: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…20.7%

511 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers17%attributed speech425writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 7 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 15 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageUnited States • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageVox • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
56 attributed words65% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+98.4 ptsWriter: 1.6%Donald Trump: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+45.2 ptsWriter: 15.5%Donald Trump: 60.7%60.7%Quote-first Misdirection+23.0 ptsWriter: 3.8%Donald Trump: 26.8%26.8%Attempt to Sell a Product -22.1 ptsWriter: 22.1%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-9.2 ptsWriter: 9.2%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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