BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Framing Effect, and Status Quo Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 70.7% saturation with 82 hits. Analysis detected 460 faulty-reasoning hits from 116 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 84.2% and a BS Rank of 91% (2,071 of 21,170 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 90.20% of the article peer group.

Stadium food and drinks often cost more than comparable items outside the venue. 
Exclusive concession contracts, private stadium operations, and restrictions on outside food have created a captive market that allows teams and vendors to charge fans more, even though many stadiums were built with taxpayer dollars. 
Today, fans at many stadiums are a captive audience, with limited or no ability to bring outside food, prompting lawmakers to propose legislation to cap concession prices at a fixed percentage above local street prices at publicly funded venues. 
But legal questions surrounding privately operated stadiums and the role of public subsidies have made it difficult to regulate concession prices. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 9.8%Business Insider: 2.3%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 3.7%Business Insider: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.2%Nikita Grant: 3.7%Business Insider: 3.4%Availability Heuristic11.2%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 18.1%Nikita Grant: 6.0%Business Insider: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias18.1%This article: 41.4%Nikita Grant: 30.2%Business Insider: 4.8%Framing Effect41.4%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 9.8%Business Insider: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 33.6%Nikita Grant: 11.2%Business Insider: 0.7%Status Quo Bias33.6%This article: 29.3%Nikita Grant: 9.8%Business Insider: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect29.3%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 2.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 1.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 29.3%Nikita Grant: 21.0%Business Insider: 4.7%Negativity Bias29.3%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 3.4%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 11.2%Business Insider: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.2%Nikita Grant: 18.7%Business Insider: 3.8%Hasty Generalization11.2%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 33.6%Nikita Grant: 21.0%Business Insider: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion33.6%This article: 29.3%Nikita Grant: 9.8%Business Insider: 0.7%Begging the Question29.3%This article: 62.9%Nikita Grant: 30.7%Business Insider: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)62.9%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 3.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 25.9%Nikita Grant: 8.6%Business Insider: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)25.9%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 1.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 70.7%Nikita Grant: 48.3%Business Insider: 3.4%Biased Writer Voice70.7%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 1.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nikita Grant: 0.0%Business Insider: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

116 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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