BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Appeal to Authority, and Negativity Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 17.1% saturation with 72 hits. Analysis detected 268 faulty-reasoning hits from 421 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 26.5% and a BS Rank of 19% (24,887 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 81.40% of the article peer group.

Iran struck Kuwait and President Donald Trump held a televised cabinet meeting Friday, as the Iran War entered its 154th day. 
In a statement carried by Iran’s Tasnim News Agency, the Iranian military announced it struck Kuwait in retaliation for a U.S. attack Wednesday evening that reportedly killed two adults and their toddler, while also injuring two other children. 
(Iran has labeled this a war crime.) 
According to Iran, IRGC “suicide drones struck fighter jet shelters, satellite communication systems, and equipment warehouses at Ahmad Al Jaber Air Base in Kuwait.” 
Citing U.S. officials, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday evening that the Pentagon is “now rethinking the scope of its footprint” in Kuwait. 
Iran also claimed to have struck two oil tankers Friday morning, and its Persian Gulf Strait Authority said in a statement Friday that “transit through the Strait of Hormuz is not possible.” 
CENTCOM disputes this, posting on X Friday that “the Strait of Hormuz remains open for commercial vessel transit. 
Iran does not control it.” 
Kpler’s shipping tracker service reported that commercial crossings dipped from 22 on Wednesday to 5 on Thursday, and noted that “all five vessels used the Iranian Unilateral Scheme,” rather than the southerly Omani route favored by the United States. 
In the Red Sea, Kpler reported that traffic through the Bab el Mandeb Strait was fairly robust, with 47 reported transits Thursday. 
An article published in the Washington Post asserted that during the month of July, “the U.S. hit at least six bridges and tunnels surrounding the port city of Bandar Abbas” and also “damaged communications lines, a rail station and a desalination plant.” 
Saudi Arabia on Thursday announced the formation of a maritime coalition to confront Yemen’s Houthi rebels, who have attempted to enforce a maritime embargo against the Gulf kingdom. 
Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Sudan, and ten other countries confirmed their participation in the coalition. 
In Lebanon, the Israeli military carried out a massive demolition near Beaufort Castle, a Crusader-era fortress listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. 
The IDF is also reported to have shelled houses and other structures in the Tyre area. 
According to reporting by the Financial Times , oil giants Exxon and Chevron both posted record profits during the second quarter of this year, largely as a result of Iran War-related energy shocks. 
The price of Brent Crude oil was $88.50 per barrel on Friday. 
AAA reported the national average price of gas at $4.11 per gallon. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 5.2%The American Conservative: 7.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.5%The American Conservative: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 4.5%The American Conservative: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.8%The American Conservative: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.3%The American Conservative: 1.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 4.0%The American Conservative: 3.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 10.0%The American Conservative: 7.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.3%The American Conservative: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.7%The American Conservative: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.1%The American Conservative: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.5%The American Conservative: 1.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 2.0%The American Conservative: 2.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.7%Harrison Berger: 10.1%The American Conservative: 9.6%Negativity Bias9.7%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.5%The American Conservative: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.1%The American Conservative: 2.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.3%The American Conservative: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.1%The American Conservative: 2.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.2%The American Conservative: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.4%The American Conservative: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.0%The American Conservative: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.0%The American Conservative: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.9%The American Conservative: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.3%The American Conservative: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.2%The American Conservative: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.4%The American Conservative: 2.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.5%The American Conservative: 1.8%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.0%Harrison Berger: 6.1%The American Conservative: 3.9%Appeal to Authority10.0%This article: 7.6%Harrison Berger: 2.4%The American Conservative: 3.0%False Dilemma7.6%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 2.3%The American Conservative: 2.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.3%The American Conservative: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 5.1%The American Conservative: 8.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.2%The American Conservative: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.5%The American Conservative: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 1.7%Harrison Berger: 5.6%The American Conservative: 5.1%Appeal to Emotion1.7%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 1.5%The American Conservative: 1.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 17.1%Harrison Berger: 2.7%The American Conservative: 4.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)17.1%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.2%The American Conservative: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.6%The American Conservative: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.0%The American Conservative: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.0%The American Conservative: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.7%The American Conservative: 1.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.1%The American Conservative: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 10.2%Harrison Berger: 2.1%The American Conservative: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)10.2%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.0%The American Conservative: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.0%The American Conservative: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.0%The American Conservative: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.1%The American Conservative: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.2%The American Conservative: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.7%Harrison Berger: 5.2%The American Conservative: 3.0%Unattributed Quote5.7%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 3.3%The American Conservative: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 1.7%Harrison Berger: 7.3%The American Conservative: 15.1%Biased Writer Voice1.7%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.9%The American Conservative: 2.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.8%The American Conservative: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.8%The American Conservative: 3.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harrison Berger: 0.3%The American Conservative: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

421 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers47%attributed speech222writer words
Selected voice

Washington Post

100%flagged-word coverage
42 attributed words21% of attributed speech66% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Unattributed Quote-10.8 ptsWriter: 10.8%Washington Post: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-3.2 ptsWriter: 3.2%Washington Post: 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.