Farewell, StateImpact New Hampshire0%

By Amanda Loder0%

7/31/2013, 6:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Overconfidence Bias, with Self-Serving Bias as the most egregious example at 62.5% saturation with 160 hits. Analysis detected 449 faulty-reasoning hits from 260 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 16,813 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

From Left: StateImpact Reporter Emily Corwin, NHPR News Director Sarah Ashworth, and StateImpact Reporter Amanda Loder 
After two years and hundreds of posts, multimedia features, and radio stories, StateImpact New Hampshire is freezing this website and moving our business and economic coverage to NHPR. 
StateImpact New Hampshire launched in late July of 2011 as a pilot collaboration between NPR and New Hampshire Public Radio. 
The mission was to cover the business beat in a way that hadn't been done before: using a combination of multimedia, data analysis, and shoe-leather reporting to break down how public policies, trends, and daily news developments affect regular people. 
A hallmark of StateImpact New Hampshire has been our flexibility. 
We began as a one-person, all-digital operation in our first year, focusing heavily on data and trends. 
In the spring of 2012, we added a team member and expanded our reach into radio features, special series, and even video. 
We will take this multi-faceted reporting mindset to the NHPR newsroom, where we will continue to find innovative ways to cover business, the economy, and other issues important to Granite Staters. 
We thank you for following us on our social media accounts and RSS feed, and for checking in with the site. 
We're proud of what we've accomplished in such a short stretch of time, and hope you will continue to follow our work at NHPR. 
It's always tough to narrow down years of work into a short list of highlights…but these are the stories that readers, listeners, and our peers have singled-out: 
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Confirmation Bias
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Framing Effect
28.9%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Halo Effect
11.7%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Horn Effect
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Loss Aversion
0%
Negativity Bias
0%
Optimism Bias
12.1%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
15.6%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Self-Serving Bias
62.5%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Anecdotal
0%
Appeal to Authority
18.4%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Bandwagon
10.5%
Begging the Question
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Composition/Division
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Hasty Generalization
15.6%
Middle Ground
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Red Herring
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Straw Man
0%
Tu Quoque
0%

256 words analyzed.

Analysis

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