Fox News94%

Ex-CBS reporter claims questioning Fauci got her 'pulled off-air' during COVID pandemic 64%

7/30/2026, 6:04:47 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Availability Heuristic, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 24.5% saturation with 125 hits. Analysis detected 1,066 faulty-reasoning hits from 511 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52% and a BS Rank of 64% (9,699 of 26,717 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 63.70% of the article peer group.

Former CBS News journalist Brittney Hopper claimed Thursday that she got into trouble after questioning Dr. 
Anthony Fauci , former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) director, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. 
Hopper appeared on News24 in Australia to discuss Fauci's decision to invoke his Fifth Amendment right more than 100 times during his congressional hearing Wednesday, refusing to answer any questions. 
Before reacting to Fauci's hearing, the independent journalist, who previously worked for CBS News Los Angeles until 2022, gave her own history reporting on Fauci and how he was deified by the mainstream media. 
"I have so much to say because this was during the time when I was on CBS News, I was reporting extensively on COVID," Hopper said. 
"I was out there on the front lines. 
And I remember after a couple of years of dealing with hearing this man and interviewing this man, and having to wear masks and having our kids out of school for years, I remember questioning what he was doing. 
And I got in trouble and pulled off-air for a couple of days because I started questioning him." 
She later added, "You weren't supposed to question the agenda and the narrative at that point. 
And I apologized and I went back on air covering what I was supposed to do as I've mentioned before on here. 
I was their puppet on mainstream media for so many years. 
Hopefully, more and more people are waking up to, you know, really, the lack of journalistic integrity that we're seeing." 
Hopper said that she was not shocked by Fauci's response during his hearing but hoped that the "insanity" of him refusing to answer questions opens people's eyes to his lack of knowledge during the pandemic. 
"I hope that this is somewhat of a wake-up call for news organizations around the world," Hopper said. 
"The six feet apart thing that he made up, wearing masks outside with not a single soul around us, you know, there were so many questions that were left unanswered and… let me give him the benefit of the doubt. 
That first year, many of us  we had no idea what was going on, but then when we started to learn more and more and started to really use journalistic integrity, which maybe that’s just been thrown out the window… news agencies jumped on the bandwagon with him and just feared so many Americans." 
When reached by Fox News Digital , CBS News clarified that Hopper had left the network prior to editor-in-chief Bari Weiss taking over in 2025. 
In addition to facing criticism from GOP lawmakers over his hearing performance, Fauci faced renewed scrutiny over excerpts from his private diary, which revealed comments that contradicted his public statements. 
For example, despite repeatedly claiming in 2022 that he did not endorse COVID lockdowns, Fauci wrote in several 2020 diary entries about how he recommended lockdowns to city, state and federal officials, including President Donald Trump. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 24.5%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias24.5%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 15.5%Fox Nation: 3.5%Availability Heuristic15.5%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 7.0%Fox Nation: 0.8%Hindsight Bias7.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 11.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.9%Fox Nation: 2.7%Optimism Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 14.9%Fox Nation: 10.5%Negativity Bias14.9%This article: 7.8%Fox Nation: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias7.8%This article: 2.2%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error2.2%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 3.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 2.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 2.2%Fox Nation: 2.4%Ad Hominem2.2%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.9%Fox Nation: 4.8%Appeal to Authority5.9%This article: 7.8%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma7.8%This article: 10.8%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope10.8%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.8%Fox Nation: 5.9%Hasty Generalization6.8%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 14.7%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon14.7%This article: 21.1%Fox Nation: 7.6%Appeal to Emotion21.1%This article: 3.1%Fox Nation: 1.2%Begging the Question3.1%This article: 3.5%Fox Nation: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.5%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 15.5%Fox Nation: 2.3%Anecdotal15.5%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.0%Fox Nation: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.5%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.8%Fox Nation: 1.7%Unattributed Quote7.8%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 19.6%Fox Nation: 6.1%Biased Writer Voice19.6%This article: 7.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination7.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 3.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fox Nation: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

511 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers79%attributed speech108writer words
Selected voice

Brittney Hopper

77%flagged-word coverage
378 attributed words94% of attributed speech61% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Biased Writer Voice+26.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Brittney Hopper: 26.5%26.5%Unattributed Quote+10.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Brittney Hopper: 10.6%10.6%Indoctrination+9.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Brittney Hopper: 9.5%9.5%

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.