Newsday⁠30%

Cold cases from the 1990s: Could the Gilgo serial killer be tied to them? ⁠57%

By Newsday Studios⁠43% News12/ Pool. Photo Credit: Newsday/ James Carbone⁠69% Suffolk County District Attorney⁠69% North Shore High School⁠69%

8/7/2026, 2:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 36.6% saturation with 30 hits. Analysis detected 176 faulty-reasoning hits from 82 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 46.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠57% (12,915 of 29,687 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 56.50% of the article peer group.

A Newsday review turned up half a dozen instances of unidentified remains found on LI in the early '90s — a period when the admitted serial killer began committing murders. 
NewsdayTV’s Shari Einhorn hosts a discussion with Suffolk County District Attorney Ray Tierney and Newsday criminal justice reporter Anthony DeStefano. 
Credit: Newsday Studios; News12/ Pool. 
Photo Credit: Newsday/ James Carbone; Suffolk County District Attorney; North Shore High School 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 36.6%Newsday Studios: 15.9%Newsday: 1.9%Confirmation Bias36.6%This article: 36.6%Newsday Studios: 4.0%Newsday: 0.7%Anchoring Bias36.6%This article: 17.1%Newsday Studios: 13.8%Newsday: 2.4%Availability Heuristic17.1%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.1%Newsday Studios: 9.9%Newsday: 4.5%Framing Effect17.1%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 4.0%Newsday: 1.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.9%Newsday: 8.4%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 1.6%Newsday: 1.5%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 2.7%Newsday: 3.0%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 17.1%Newsday Studios: 1.9%Newsday: 0.7%False Dilemma17.1%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 36.6%Newsday Studios: 9.9%Newsday: 2.0%Hasty Generalization36.6%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 3.5%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 36.6%Newsday Studios: 12.1%Newsday: 1.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)36.6%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 2.4%Newsday: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 1.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 1.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 17.1%Newsday Studios: 10.2%Newsday: 2.5%Biased Writer Voice17.1%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 2.2%Newsday: 0.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsday Studios: 0.0%Newsday: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

82 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.