wtop.com32%

Fire breaks out at a pub in Bangkok 5%

By WTOP Staff29%

7/13/2026, 6:01:55 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 2 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 32.8% saturation with 198 hits. Analysis detected 240 faulty-reasoning hits from 603 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 19.9% and a BS Rank of 5% (20,883 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 95.40% of the article peer group.

Bodies of victims of a fire are seen laid in a row in Bangkok, Thailand, Monday, July 13, 2026. 
(AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit) 
Bodies of victims of a fire are seen laid in a row in Bangkok, Thailand, Monday, July 13, 2026. 
(AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit) 
BANGKOK (AP)  A huge fire tore through a beer hall in Bangkok overnight into Monday, killing at least 27 people and injuring dozens before firefighters brought the blaze under control. 
Footage shared online by first responders shows a huge blaze raging and plumes coming out of the front door of the Na Ladprao beer hall in the northern part of the Thai capital. 
People are seen trying to flee as thick black smoke billows into the sky. 
Authorities are still investigating the cause of the fire, but Bangkok Gov. 
Chadchart Sittipunt said investigators would examine the ceiling materials and whether any emergency exits may have been obstructed, potentially making it more difficult for people to evacuate. 
The Bangkok city government said the fire broke out shortly before midnight Sunday. 
By Monday morning, the site had been cordoned off as dozens of Thai forensic officers combed through the burned remains for clues about what caused the fire. 
The building’s street-facing windows had been blown out and debris littered the sidewalk, including charred television sets, speakers and an electric guitar. 
From outside, the scale of the devastation was visible through the shattered windows, where burned-out tables, some still holding empty beer bottles, remained inside. 
Some Buddhist monks visited the site Monday morning to pray for the victims, while nurses handed out face masks to people nearby to help protect them from smoke and lingering fumes from the burned-out building. 
Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul told reporters at the scene that 27 people died. 
Anutin said a musician who was performing at the bar told him that he saw smoke coming out of a circuit breaker near the stage before the power went out, then an explosion was heard and thick smoke quickly filled the place. 
Many of victims were found at the restrooms at the back of the bar, Anutin added. 
Bangkok Gov. said 63 people were taken to the hospital, 22 of them in critical conditions. 
He said authorities are working on identifying victims as many did not carry an ID or were unconscious. 
Firefighters took about half an hour to bring the fire under control. 
Photos of the aftermath show charred tables and chairs, and the damaged interior of the bar. 
A registration spot was set up to gather information from relatives coming at the scene looking for their loved ones. 
Singer Sukanya Wongwongwai said she was performing nearby when she heard news of the fire and rushed to the scene because several of her bandmates were performing at the bar. 
She said one of them died, three were hospitalized, and one hasn’t been located. 
“From what I heard from people who were inside, when the fire started everything went dark. 
The power was out and there was smoke everywhere, so they couldn’t locate other people,” she said. 
In 2022, 14 people were killed by a fire at a music bar in the eastern part of the country. 
And more than a decade before that, 67 people were killed and more than 200 injured in a fire during a Jan. 
1, 2009 New Year’s Eve celebration at the Santika nightclub in Thailand’s capital. 
That blaze was apparently sparked by an indoor fireworks display. 
___ 
This story has been updated to correct the death toll from the 2009 fire to 67. 
Source 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 3.3%WTOP: 3.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.7%WTOP: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%WTOP Staff: 3.5%WTOP: 3.6%Availability Heuristic7.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.1%WTOP: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.6%WTOP: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.2%WTOP: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 8.0%WTOP: 8.1%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.5%WTOP: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.6%WTOP: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.2%WTOP: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 2.1%WTOP: 2.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.7%WTOP: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 32.8%WTOP Staff: 8.2%WTOP: 8.5%Negativity Bias32.8%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.2%WTOP: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.8%WTOP: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.2%WTOP: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.8%WTOP: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.5%WTOP: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 2.8%WTOP: 2.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.0%WTOP: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.2%WTOP: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.2%WTOP: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.4%WTOP: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 4.7%WTOP: 4.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.1%WTOP: 1.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.7%WTOP: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 3.0%WTOP: 3.0%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.5%WTOP: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 4.5%WTOP: 4.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.6%WTOP: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 2.4%WTOP: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.0%WTOP: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.7%WTOP: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.5%WTOP: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 2.2%WTOP: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.0%WTOP: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.0%WTOP: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.1%WTOP: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.0%WTOP: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.7%WTOP: 1.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.1%WTOP: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 4.1%WTOP: 4.0%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.6%WTOP: 0.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 1.0%WTOP: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.4%WTOP: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WTOP Staff: 0.2%WTOP: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

603 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers37%attributed speech381writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageChadchart Sittipunt • 27 words • 0.0% coverageBangkok city government • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageAnutin Charnvirakul • 13 words • 0.0% coverageAnutin Charnvirakul • 42 words • 0.0% coverageAnutin Charnvirakul • 16 words • 0.0% coverageBangkok city government • 16 words • 0.0% coverageBangkok city government • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageSukanya Wongwongwai • 30 words • 0.0% coverageSukanya Wongwongwai • 14 words • 0.0% coverageSukanya Wongwongwai • 16 words • 0.0% coverageSukanya Wongwongwai • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Sukanya Wongwongwai

0%flagged-word coverage
77 attributed words35% of attributed speech63% 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…

Analysis

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