Eastsiders can get backpacks, school supplies at this event 15%

By Carley Lanich9%

8/3/2026, 2:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Appeal to Authority, and Optimism Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 27.4% saturation with 40 hits. Analysis detected 231 faulty-reasoning hits from 146 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 24% and a BS Rank of 15% (26,046 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 85.20% of the article peer group.

Eastsiders can get free backpacks, haircuts and car washes at an upcoming back-to-school fair. 
Skilled US, a job training program with a presence on Indianapolis’ east side, is organizing the fair. 
Free items for school will be given out while supplies last. 
There will be food, games, face painting and a DJ. 
Families can learn about school enrollment, job training opportunities and English language classes offered in the community. 
The back-to-school fair runs from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. 
Aug. 8 at 2855 N. 
Franklin Road. 
Visit Skilled US’ Facebook page for more information. 
Mirror Indy, a nonprofit newsroom, is funded through grants and donations from individuals, foundations and organizations. 
Sign up for our free newsletters. 
Mirror Indy reporter Carley Lanich covers early childhood and K-12 education. 
Contact her at carley.lanich@mirrorindy.org or follow her on X @carleylanich. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.2%Mirror Indy: 1.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.2%Mirror Indy: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 5.5%Carley Lanich: 0.8%Mirror Indy: 1.4%Availability Heuristic5.5%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.4%Mirror Indy: 0.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 27.4%Carley Lanich: 2.7%Mirror Indy: 1.7%Framing Effect27.4%This article: 17.1%Carley Lanich: 1.1%Mirror Indy: 0.6%Loss Aversion17.1%This article: 4.1%Carley Lanich: 0.1%Mirror Indy: 0.4%Status Quo Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 17.8%Carley Lanich: 2.0%Mirror Indy: 1.9%Optimism Bias17.8%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 2.9%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.2%Mirror Indy: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.4%Mirror Indy: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%Carley Lanich: 2.3%Mirror Indy: 1.3%Halo Effect7.5%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.4%Mirror Indy: 0.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 19.2%Carley Lanich: 2.4%Mirror Indy: 1.4%Appeal to Authority19.2%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.2%Mirror Indy: 2.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.2%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.4%Mirror Indy: 1.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.2%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 1.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 2.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.8%Carley Lanich: 0.1%Mirror Indy: 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.8%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.4%Mirror Indy: 0.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 6.2%Carley Lanich: 0.1%Mirror Indy: 0.1%Quote-first Misdirection6.2%This article: 17.1%Carley Lanich: 2.3%Mirror Indy: 1.7%Biased Writer Voice17.1%This article: 11.6%Carley Lanich: 1.1%Mirror Indy: 0.9%Indoctrination11.6%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carley Lanich: 0.0%Mirror Indy: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 19.9%Carley Lanich: 6.0%Mirror Indy: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…19.9%

146 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers23%attributed speech113writer words
Selected voice

Skilled US

100%flagged-word coverage
17 attributed words52% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -25.7 ptsWriter: 25.7%Skilled US: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-15.0 ptsWriter: 15.0%Skilled US: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-8.0 ptsWriter: 8.0%Skilled US: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.0 ptsWriter: 8.0%Skilled US: 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.