Angelina Jolie steps out in LA after pushing back on ex Brad Pitt's attempt to secure her tax returns ⁠23%

By Ashleigh Gray⁠0%

7/4/2026, 5:48:14 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Self-Serving Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 40.8% saturation with 131 hits. Analysis detected 397 faulty-reasoning hits from 321 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 36.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠23% (16,863 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 77.00% of the article peer group.

Angelina Jolie was spotted out and about in Los Angeles on the Fourth of July holiday. 
The 51-year-old actress was clad in a black maxi dress with billowy, elbow-grazing sleeves as she ran errands in the Studio City neighborhood. 
She draped a large brown leather bag with gold hardware over her shoulder during the outing. 
And the mom of six carried a large white coffee cup while sporting square-shaped, black-rimmed eyeglasses. 
Her long, blonde highlighted locks were swept into a messy bun and secured with a clip. 
It comes amid Jolie's ongoing legal war with ex-husband Brad Pitt, 62, who recently attempted to retrieve her tax returns from the three years following their split. 
It stems from a disagreement regarding their shared French winery, Château Miraval. 
Pitt claims ex-wife Jolie sold her stake behind his back, breaking an agreement they previously made that they would not sell without the other's knowledge. 
The Fight Club star, 62, in legal documents reviewed by the Daily Mail, requested Jolie turn in her tax records and other financial documents pertaining to the years 2017–2019, based on remarks she made that she says Pitt is taking out of context. 
Jolie's legal team said the gist of her remark was that she had been looking for 'financial independence from her ex-husband.' 
It was added that 'separating from one's ex-husband is categorically different from allegations that one is suffering from general financial distress.' 
Her team emphasized that she had been looking to 'untangle her life and her finances from' Pitt. 
Jolie and Pitt are parents to six children: Maddox, 24, Pax, 22, Zahara, 21, Shiloh, 19, and twins Vivienne and Knox, 17. 
They split in 2016 following a 12-year relationship and two-year marriage, with their divorce finalized eight years later in December 2024 amid a number of legal battles. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.5%Daily Mail: 3.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.7%Daily Mail: 1.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.9%Daily Mail: 3.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.4%Daily Mail: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 8.4%Ashleigh Gray: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.8%Hindsight Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.1%Daily Mail: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 40.8%Ashleigh Gray: 4.9%Daily Mail: 9.1%Framing Effect40.8%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.3%Daily Mail: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.5%Daily Mail: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.1%Daily Mail: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 2.7%Daily Mail: 2.3%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.5%Daily Mail: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 23.4%Ashleigh Gray: 6.1%Daily Mail: 12.8%Negativity Bias23.4%This article: 14.3%Ashleigh Gray: 2.5%Daily Mail: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias14.3%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.5%Daily Mail: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.2%Daily Mail: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 10.6%Daily Mail: 4.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.3%Daily Mail: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.4%Ashleigh Gray: 2.2%Daily Mail: 1.6%Recency Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.9%Daily Mail: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.5%Daily Mail: 1.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 13.4%Ashleigh Gray: 2.2%Daily Mail: 4.0%Appeal to Authority13.4%This article: 6.5%Ashleigh Gray: 0.7%Daily Mail: 1.1%False Dilemma6.5%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 3.4%Daily Mail: 4.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.4%Daily Mail: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 6.9%Daily Mail: 7.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.5%Daily Mail: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.7%Daily Mail: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.3%Daily Mail: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.1%Daily Mail: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 2.4%Daily Mail: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.1%Daily Mail: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.4%Ashleigh Gray: 1.6%Daily Mail: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.4%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.1%Daily Mail: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.4%Daily Mail: 3.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.1%Daily Mail: 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 5.3%Daily Mail: 9.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 1.1%Daily Mail: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashleigh Gray: 2.3%Daily Mail: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

321 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers26%attributed speech237writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Pitt • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageJolie's legal team • 21 words • 0.0% coverageJolie's legal team • 21 words • 0.0% coverageJolie's legal team • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Brad Pitt

100%flagged-word coverage
25 attributed words30% of attributed speech49% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

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.