BS Summary: This article contains 33 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Pessimism Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 38.3% saturation with 272 hits. Analysis detected 1,751 faulty-reasoning hits from 710 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 59.6% and a BS Rank of 65% (7,244 of 20,453 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 64.60% of the article peer group.

“Here we are today. 
Back at this bridge. 
When I was a little girl, Dr. 
King said to us, ‘Children, when I ask you, what do you want, I want you to say freedom.’ 
And here we are, 61 years later.” 70-year-old Sheyann Webb-Christburg fears progress is being undone in Alabama as the state’s Republican-led Legislature races to redraw the state’s voting map before the midterm elections. 
Last month, the Supreme Court struck down a key Voting Rights Act protection for minority voters. 
Now, the extent of that ruling is being tested. 
After a federal court ruled that the state’s redrawn map discriminates against Black people, Alabama has appealed to the Supreme Court to allow the state to use it. 
Sheyann says the effort reignites memories of a darker past. 
“Many people, if they registered to vote back in the 60s, their lives was threatened.” 
At 8 years old, she witnessed it firsthand. 
“What happened here on Bloody Sunday?” 
“As we made our way across this bridge, I’ll never forget seeing the policemen with tear gas. 
People had begun to be beaten, just trampling over people as if they weren’t human beings. 
And the picture of Bloody Sunday has never left my heart.” 
Since the Supreme Court ruling, Republican leaders have moved quickly to break up majority Black districts across the South, including here in Alabama. 
These two Democratic districts were created to allow Black voters the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. 
But with five months before the midterms, conservatives across the South argue race should not be a factor in the creation of voter districts. 
“You cannot say that we are all created equal, and that states must treat everyone equal under the law, and then allow a law to sort people based upon race.” 
“I’m looking forward to the day when Alabama gets a 7-0 congressional representation. 
It’s consistent with who we are as a very conservative state.” 
“A reminder that justice matters. 
Truth matters. 
Democracy matters because biblical justice protects those who are vulnerable.” 
In Montgomery, a history of disenfranchisement leaves Alabama’s heavily Democratic Black population fearing their district and their voices will be erased. 
“Not happy with what’s being done in the statehouse.” 
“Yeah.” 
“I feel like I’ve reached the top of the stairs and someone just  and pushed me.” 
“Yeah, yeah, yeah.” 
“And pushed my children.” 
“What would losing representation mean to people in this district?” 
“There are people who don’t have running water and who have live sewage in their front yards. 
And it was not until representation was present that those neighbors were actually able to be served. 
If you have no one at the table who is representing your interest and who is concerned about you, then you know that you will not be represented in the result.” 
Beyond representation, activists like Anneshia Hardy worry this redistricting battle will cause voters to lose faith in the democratic process. 
“Folks are like, ‘Are elections still happening? 
Will it even matter if we go and vote?’ 
So when you cause that type of confusion, oftentimes it results in disengagement. 
And that does not just hurt Black folks. 
That hurts us all.” 
Crowd: “We’re not going back.” 
The New York Times reached out to Alabama’s Republican leadership, but they did not acknowledge our interview requests. 
“Ain’t no power like the power of the people cause the power of the people don’t stop.” 
It remains unclear which maps will be used in the midterm elections. 
Until then, advocates are organizing rallies to register their protest. 
“As a Black woman in this country, just about every right that I have is some type of law that can be overturned. 
And in my lifetime, I’m actively watching those efforts happen. 
Even as they dilute the power, we need folks to go and vote. 
We need folks to continue to show up even more.” 
In silent defiance, Sheyann marched in Selma again. 
“Much blood, sweat, and tears were shed in an effort for African Americans to gain their right to vote. 
We got to fight for them. 
Even though they are no longer with us, in my mind, they are counting on us.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.7%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.9%The New York Times: 1.7%Confirmation Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.2%Bethlehem Feleke: 6.3%The New York Times: 2.1%Availability Heuristic13.2%This article: 1.5%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.4%The New York Times: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic1.5%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.5%The New York Times: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Bethlehem Feleke: 1.1%The New York Times: 2.4%Overconfidence Bias4.4%This article: 11.1%Bethlehem Feleke: 11.8%The New York Times: 5.8%Framing Effect11.1%This article: 4.4%Bethlehem Feleke: 1.5%The New York Times: 0.6%Loss Aversion4.4%This article: 1.4%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.4%The New York Times: 0.4%Status Quo Bias1.4%This article: 3.5%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.9%The New York Times: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect3.5%This article: 1.8%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.5%The New York Times: 2.7%Optimism Bias1.8%This article: 18.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 6.4%The New York Times: 3.5%Pessimism Bias18.0%This article: 38.3%Bethlehem Feleke: 12.5%The New York Times: 9.4%Negativity Bias38.3%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 1.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 7.2%Bethlehem Feleke: 1.8%The New York Times: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error7.2%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 11.5%Bethlehem Feleke: 4.2%The New York Times: 1.1%In-Group Bias11.5%This article: 3.4%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.8%The New York Times: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.6%Bethlehem Feleke: 1.4%The New York Times: 1.1%Recency Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 1.4%Bethlehem Feleke: 1.7%The New York Times: 4.0%Appeal to Authority1.4%This article: 4.2%Bethlehem Feleke: 2.1%The New York Times: 1.2%False Dilemma4.2%This article: 0.7%Bethlehem Feleke: 2.3%The New York Times: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.7%This article: 8.6%Bethlehem Feleke: 3.6%The New York Times: 0.1%Circular Reasoning8.6%This article: 7.9%Bethlehem Feleke: 3.4%The New York Times: 2.7%Hasty Generalization7.9%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.9%Bethlehem Feleke: 2.8%The New York Times: 0.2%Bandwagon4.9%This article: 32.4%Bethlehem Feleke: 23.8%The New York Times: 3.4%Appeal to Emotion32.4%This article: 2.3%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.6%The New York Times: 0.4%Begging the Question2.3%This article: 2.4%Bethlehem Feleke: 1.7%The New York Times: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.4%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 10.7%Bethlehem Feleke: 5.8%The New York Times: 1.0%Anecdotal10.7%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.7%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.2%The New York Times: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.7%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.0%The New York Times: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 12.5%Bethlehem Feleke: 12.2%The New York Times: 2.1%Unattributed Quote12.5%This article: 4.6%Bethlehem Feleke: 2.5%The New York Times: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection4.6%This article: 6.1%Bethlehem Feleke: 1.5%The New York Times: 3.8%Biased Writer Voice6.1%This article: 6.2%Bethlehem Feleke: 2.0%The New York Times: 0.5%Indoctrination6.2%This article: 6.3%Bethlehem Feleke: 4.8%The New York Times: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias6.3%This article: 3.2%Bethlehem Feleke: 2.7%The New York Times: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias3.2%This article: 2.3%Bethlehem Feleke: 0.6%The New York Times: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.3%

710 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers14%attributed speech610writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDr. King • 19 words • 0.0% coverageSheyann Webb-Christburg • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageSheyann Webb-Christburg • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageAnneshia Hardy • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageThe New York Times • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
43 attributed words43% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Sheyann Webb-Christburg: 100.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote-14.6 ptsWriter: 14.6%Sheyann Webb-Christburg: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-7.4 ptsWriter: 7.4%Sheyann Webb-Christburg: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-7.2 ptsWriter: 7.2%Sheyann Webb-Christburg: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-5.4 ptsWriter: 5.4%Sheyann Webb-Christburg: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -3.8 ptsWriter: 3.8%Sheyann Webb-Christburg: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.6 ptsWriter: 2.6%Sheyann Webb-Christburg: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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