Fox News98%

Democrat organizer PRAISES slain ayatollah as ‘greatest anti-imperialist leader’ 90%

7/7/2026, 5:45:06 PM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Appeal to Emotion, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 39.6% saturation with 78 hits. Analysis detected 638 faulty-reasoning hits from 197 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 83.8% and a BS Rank of 90% (2,185 of 21,887 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 90.00% of the video peer group.

He was a leader to all people of the world who struggle against imperialism, 
against arrogance, against Zionism, 
against genocide. To me, he was the greatest anti-imperialist leader to have 
lived during my lifetime. 
>> I want to remind our viewers what the 
Ayatollah was about, Rosanna. I'm going to ask our team to pull up a picture of 
Mahsa Amini. 
This is a young woman who went to Iran with her brother, was captured by the state police there for 
not wearing a veil, sent to be re-educated. 
Eyewitnesses, according to Amnesty International, pushed her into a van, beat her hours after her arrest. 
The morality police subjected her to torture, ill-treatment inside police vans. 
She died in custody three days later. 
That woman has no clue what Iran does to women. 
does to women. 
>> Well, I think she does. I think she's ignoring it. 
I mean, America, the land 
of the free, free speech, but this is deeply offensive speech. 
And the outrage is what she chose to celebrate. 
The Ayatollah led a regime accused of brutal repression at home, support for terrorist proxies abroad. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.7%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias13.7%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 20.3%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic20.3%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 16.2%Fox Nation: 3.0%Overconfidence Bias16.2%This article: 22.8%Fox Nation: 11.9%Framing Effect22.8%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias4.1%This article: 39.6%Fox Nation: 10.8%Negativity Bias39.6%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error5.1%This article: 4.6%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Fox Nation: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias7.1%This article: 7.1%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect7.1%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias2.0%This article: 15.2%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect15.2%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 22.3%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority22.3%This article: 5.6%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma5.6%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.6%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization7.6%This article: 2.5%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring2.5%This article: 8.1%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon8.1%This article: 23.9%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion23.9%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 3.6%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.6%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 22.3%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof22.3%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 7.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division7.1%This article: 35.5%Fox Nation: 2.4%Anecdotal35.5%This article: 2.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman2.0%This article: 17.3%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)17.3%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 8.1%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy8.1%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

197 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.1%attributed speech181writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageAmnesty International • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Amnesty International

100%flagged-word coverage
16 attributed words100% of attributed speech99% 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.