The Metro: Discover What’s So Funny About Detroit at The Old Miami tonight ⁠32%

By Alex McLenon⁠32% Tia Graham⁠43% Haley Gavigan⁠39%

7/30/2026, 10:20:07 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 6 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Confirmation Bias, and Anecdotal, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 41.4% saturation with 53 hits. Analysis detected 124 faulty-reasoning hits from 128 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 35.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠32% (18,714 of 27,353 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 68.40% of the article peer group.

“What’s So Funny About Detroit?” 
will return to The Old Miami on Thursday, July 30. 
In the Groove’s Ryan Patrick Hooper will host comedians such as Zech, Brett Mercer and Heather Jowett. 
Melanie Hearn, an actress and writer from Detroit, will perform as a second-time headliner. 
“I’ve always loved this event because people are actually there ready for a show,” Hearn says. 
She joins The Metro to share more about her career and her connection to Detroit. 
Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and stream on-demand. 
Never miss an episode – subscribe to The Metro on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, NPR, or wherever you get your podcasts. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.5%Alex McLenon: 0.8%WDET: 1.3%Confirmation Bias12.5%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.8%WDET: 1.6%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.1%WDET: 0.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.2%Alex McLenon: 3.9%WDET: 3.3%Framing Effect10.2%This article: 16.4%Alex McLenon: 1.0%WDET: 0.7%Loss Aversion16.4%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.6%WDET: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.8%WDET: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.9%WDET: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.6%WDET: 2.8%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.9%WDET: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 2.0%WDET: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.9%WDET: 3.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.9%WDET: 2.0%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.6%WDET: 2.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.2%WDET: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.6%WDET: 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 12.5%Alex McLenon: 1.5%WDET: 1.3%Anecdotal12.5%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.2%WDET: 0.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 3.9%Alex McLenon: 0.2%WDET: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection3.9%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 2.4%WDET: 2.7%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 1.9%WDET: 1.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alex McLenon: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 41.4%Alex McLenon: 16.8%WDET: 5.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…41.4%

128 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers37%attributed speech81writer words
Selected voice

Melanie Hearn

53%flagged-word coverage
30 attributed words64% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -65.4 ptsWriter: 65.4%Melanie Hearn: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-6.2 ptsWriter: 6.2%Melanie Hearn: 0.0%0.0%

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.