BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Authority, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 24.6% saturation with 227 hits. Analysis detected 1,843 faulty-reasoning hits from 922 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 44.1% and a BS Rank of 52% (13,832 of 28,359 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 51.20% of the article peer group.

City Council Speaker Julie Menin (D-Upper East Side) called on Albany to pass its own version of New Jersey’s flawed e-bike registration law on Tuesday as she unveiled plans to hold a Sept. 30 mega-hearing to consider no less than 17 possible responses to the e-micromobility boom . 
New Jersey began requiring licenses, registration and insurance for all e-bike riders last month. 
At a “major transportation announcement” outside City Hall on Tuesday, Menin endorsed a forthcoming resolution by Council Member Gale Brewer (D-Upper West Side) that will apparently cite the controversial law. 
The speaker also emphasized that only state legislators, not city lawmakers, can regulate e-bikes. 
“[Brewer’s resolution] calls for the state to do that law,” Menin told reporters as she announced plans to hold the September mega-hearing. 
“Just like New Jersey did. 
New Jersey passed it. 
It’s a state issue.” 
Menin did not explicitly endorse most of those 17 bills, which run the gamut from requiring delivery app companies like DoorDash and UberEats to be licensed by the city Department of Consumer and Worker Protection, to prohibiting the sale and rental of 25 mile-per-hour throttled-powered “Class 3” e-bikes. 
New Jersey’s new e-bike laws added significant bureaucratic hurdles for anyone who wants to ride an e-bike in the Garden State, regardless of the speed of that bike. 
Riders with disabilities have expressed concerns about needing to pass the state licensing test, while e-bike owners have struggled to find insurance companies that offer e-bike policies. 
The Bergen Record recently ran an editorial that called on New Jersey lawmakers to revisit and revise the “rushed” legislation. 
Menin spokesman Henry Robins insisted the speaker does not support “anything on the city level that puts the onus on the individual,” but did not clarify whether she wants the state to copy New Jersey’s “toughest in the nation” law word-for-word. 
Every New Yorker deserves to move around our city freely and safely, regardless of how they get around. 
But too many people have been seriously injured or killed in crashes involving illegal e-bikes, e-motos, and e-scooters. 
That’s why the @NYCCouncil is launching a… pic.twitter.com/vYgkJfEwSA 
- Speaker Julie Menin (@SpeakerMenin) August 4, 2026 
In her comments, the speaker cited an existing resolution introduced by Brewer that only called for state licensing of commercial e-bikes. 
Robins later clarified that Brewer planned to introduce another resolution for the Sept. 30 hearing. 
That new resolution will call for licensing of all e-bikes  raising the total number of bills on the day’s docket to 18 (and counting). 
Brewer, who also claimed inspiration from New Jersey on Tuesday, balked when Streetsblog asked her whether she wanted New York to pass the same law as the Garden State. 
She told reporters she would not support any bill opposed by delivery worker Los Deliveristas Unidos  even though LDU has opposed universal licensing requirements. 
“I’m open to ideas,” Brewer told Streetsblog after the press conference. 
“I am always worried about the process.” 
Absent from the press conference, however, was any mention of the road violence caused by car drivers  who accounted for the vast majority of the e-bike injuries cited by Menin and her colleagues. 
Many cycling advocates oppose e-bike licensing and registration bills, which they argue discourage cycling without actually ensuring safety. 
After all, drivers must be licensed and have their cars registered, yet continue to wreak havoc on city streets. 
Council Speaker Julie Menin announcing her e-bike oversight hearing on Tuesday. 
The press conference followed two recent deadly crashes involving illegal electric micromobility devices. 
On July 29, a teenager who was riding an illegal Deepower e-moto died in a collision with an SUV driver near City Hall. 
And two men, including one on an illegal e-scooter, died in a head-on collision on the Queensboro Bridge in May. 
“The worst tragedies are caused by devices that are not legal to operate on our streets,” said Council Majority Leader Shaun Abreu, who chairs the body’s Committee on Transportation. 
“We cannot keep burying New Yorkers because a company decided profit was worth more than safety,” 
Abreu told Streetsblog he supports including Brewer’s resolution in the Sept. 30 mega-hearing, but hedged on what type of regulatory action the state should take. 
“Personally, I don’t think licensing and registering is going to make a difference at the local level for the reasons that have been mentioned,” he told Streetsblog. 
“To the extent that [e-bike licensing] should happen, it should be done at the state level. 
But my support is for the hearing only.” 
OPINION: Reject New Jersey’s Misguided War on E-Bikes 
Illegal e-motos and e-scooters are typically manufactured with cheap parts like manual brakes. 
They can easily switch into “off-road modes” that reach speeds of 30 to 60 mph and are simple to buy online and assemble at home. 
New York Attorney General Letitia James recently issued a consumer alert to warn New Yorkers about the proliferation of these falsely-marketed vehicles and remind sellers of the law. 
Abreu said the Council would explore new methods of enforcement against these illegal devices, like dynamometers , which are used by European cities with strict laws around e-bikes and scooters to test a vehicle’s maximum speed and power. 
“A lot of folks who buy these devices think that they’re actually legal,” he said. 
“We’re working to strengthen consumer protection laws to inform the buyers literally on the bikes themselves that they’re buying an illegal device, and we’re hoping that that awareness will make a big difference.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.5%Sophia Lebowitz: 2.3%Streetsblog NYC: 3.5%Confirmation Bias5.5%This article: 4.1%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.3%Streetsblog NYC: 0.8%Anchoring Bias4.1%This article: 14.8%Sophia Lebowitz: 4.7%Streetsblog NYC: 4.4%Availability Heuristic14.8%This article: 1.4%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.1%Streetsblog NYC: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic1.4%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.9%Streetsblog NYC: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.9%Sophia Lebowitz: 6.0%Streetsblog NYC: 4.7%Framing Effect0.9%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.5%Streetsblog NYC: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 10.8%Sophia Lebowitz: 1.5%Streetsblog NYC: 4.0%Optimism Bias10.8%This article: 3.6%Sophia Lebowitz: 1.5%Streetsblog NYC: 0.8%Pessimism Bias3.6%This article: 24.6%Sophia Lebowitz: 11.0%Streetsblog NYC: 7.3%Negativity Bias24.6%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 1.8%Streetsblog NYC: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 2.7%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.8%Streetsblog NYC: 0.6%In-Group Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 0.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.9%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 2.9%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect2.9%This article: 7.6%Sophia Lebowitz: 1.9%Streetsblog NYC: 0.9%Recency Bias7.6%This article: 2.7%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 0.4%Primacy Effect2.7%This article: 0.8%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.1%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.8%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 2.7%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.4%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Straw Man2.7%This article: 15.5%Sophia Lebowitz: 2.2%Streetsblog NYC: 2.3%Appeal to Authority15.5%This article: 2.2%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.8%Streetsblog NYC: 1.4%False Dilemma2.2%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.6%Streetsblog NYC: 0.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.9%Sophia Lebowitz: 6.1%Streetsblog NYC: 5.3%Hasty Generalization8.9%This article: 3.7%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.9%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Red Herring3.7%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.5%Sophia Lebowitz: 4.3%Streetsblog NYC: 3.5%Appeal to Emotion6.5%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.5%Streetsblog NYC: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 12.7%Sophia Lebowitz: 3.5%Streetsblog NYC: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.7%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.9%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.5%Streetsblog NYC: 0.5%Burden of Proof2.9%This article: 1.4%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.1%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Appeal to Nature1.4%This article: 2.1%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.5%Streetsblog NYC: 0.2%Composition/Division2.1%This article: 11.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 1.6%Streetsblog NYC: 2.5%Anecdotal11.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.7%Sophia Lebowitz: 2.9%Streetsblog NYC: 0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.7%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.8%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.1%Streetsblog NYC: 0.1%Special Pleading0.8%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.1%Sophia Lebowitz: 1.1%Streetsblog NYC: 1.2%Unattributed Quote9.1%This article: 1.4%Sophia Lebowitz: 1.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection1.4%This article: 22.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 6.3%Streetsblog NYC: 5.9%Biased Writer Voice22.0%This article: 2.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.2%Streetsblog NYC: 2.1%Indoctrination2.0%This article: 3.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.5%Streetsblog NYC: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sophia Lebowitz: 0.0%Streetsblog NYC: 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

922 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers52%attributed speech440writer words
Selected voice

Julie Menin

84%flagged-word coverage
89 attributed words18% of attributed speech87% writer coverage
0%40.0%80.0%Biased Writer Voice+48.4 ptsWriter: 30.2%Julie Menin: 78.7%78.7%Politically Left Leaning B-6.4 ptsWriter: 6.4%Julie Menin: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-4.8 ptsWriter: 4.8%Julie Menin: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-4.1 ptsWriter: 4.1%Julie Menin: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.0 ptsWriter: 3.0%Julie Menin: 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.