amNewYork⁠45%

Lower East Side deli worker shot during attempted robbery ⁠1%

By Dean Moses⁠53%

8/6/2026, 5:19:32 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 4 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Quote-first Misdirection, and Anchoring Bias, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 15.2% saturation with 30 hits. Analysis detected 79 faulty-reasoning hits from 198 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠1% (30,498 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 99.70% of the article peer group.

A deli worker was shot during an attempted robbery on the Lower East Side early Thursday morning, authorities said. 
According to police sources, the incident unfolded around 1:22 a.m. on Aug. 6 inside Organic Convenience, located at 170 Rivington St. 
Officers from the 7th Precinct received a 911 call reporting that a man had been shot. 
Upon arriving at the scene, officers found a 25-year-old store worker with a graze wound to the buttocks. 
EMS rushed him to Bellevue, where he was treated for his injury. 
The worker spoke to ABC7, who said the shooter brandished a gun in an attempted robbery over a packet of chips and candy. 
“He was acting like a customer, he waited for the right opportunity,” the worker told ABC7. 
Police say they are looking for a man wearing a black shirt, black shorts, and black-and-white sneakers. 
No arrests have been made, and the investigation remains ongoing. 
Anyone with information regarding this shooting can call Crime Stoppers at 800-577-TIPS (for Spanish, dial 888-57-PISTA). 
You can also submit tips online at crimestoppers.nypdonline.org, or on X (formerly Twitter) @NYPDTips. 
All calls and messages are kept confidential. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 4.5%amNewYork: 3.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%Dean Moses: 0.2%amNewYork: 0.8%Anchoring Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 4.1%amNewYork: 2.8%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.6%amNewYork: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.5%amNewYork: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.9%amNewYork: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 6.1%amNewYork: 4.7%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.2%amNewYork: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.2%amNewYork: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.2%amNewYork: 3.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.6%amNewYork: 0.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 9.9%amNewYork: 5.4%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.3%amNewYork: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.6%amNewYork: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.4%amNewYork: 1.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.2%amNewYork: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.0%amNewYork: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.6%amNewYork: 0.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 3.4%amNewYork: 2.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.4%amNewYork: 0.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.6%amNewYork: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 5.7%amNewYork: 3.2%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.3%amNewYork: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 7.2%amNewYork: 5.2%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.5%amNewYork: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 2.5%amNewYork: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.7%amNewYork: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.1%amNewYork: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 4.1%amNewYork: 1.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.9%amNewYork: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 11.6%Dean Moses: 2.5%amNewYork: 1.0%Unattributed Quote11.6%This article: 8.1%Dean Moses: 1.9%amNewYork: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection8.1%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 6.0%amNewYork: 3.7%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.5%amNewYork: 1.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 1.0%amNewYork: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dean Moses: 0.0%amNewYork: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 15.2%Dean Moses: 0.5%amNewYork: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…15.2%

198 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.1%attributed speech182writer words
Selected voice

ABC7

100%flagged-word coverage
16 attributed words100% of attributed speech35% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%ABC7: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -16.5 ptsWriter: 16.5%ABC7: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-12.6 ptsWriter: 12.6%ABC7: 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.