FM calls for referendum powers as draft independence bill published

Open the full analysis → Read the original article at BBC News →

Flags are about wording, sourcing and context, not whether it’s true or which side is right. How we check

Wording

10%of the article’s sentences use a rhetorical technique

Tap a technique to see where it’s used.

What these techniques mean

Flag-Waving Show the first one ↓

Repetition Saying the same point again to make it stick, not to add to it.Show the first one ↓

Slogans Show the first one ↓

Name Calling A label used to mock or discredit instead of an argument.Show the first one ↓

Loaded Language Emotionally charged words that push a reaction instead of giving information.Show the first one ↓

Appeal to Prejudice Leaning on the reader’s existing dislike of a group.Show the first one ↓

ClaimsCheck the factual claims in this article →

What the model flagged

underlined: technique found; pick one to highlight its words tap a technique for why

↓

Flag-WavingWhy ›

Patriotic, religious, or in-group identity invoked to validate a position.

↓

RepetitionWhy ›

Loaded word or slogan repeated to make a claim feel more established than it is.

↓

SlogansWhy ›

Catchy phrase used to compress a complex position into an emotionally loaded shorthand.

“failing SNP government”

↓

Name Calling · “failing SNP government”Why ›

The SNP government is labelled as 'failing' to discredit it rather than address specific policy failures.

“empty gestures and grandstanding”

↓

Loaded Language · “empty gestures and grandstanding”Why ›

Emotionally charged phrases like 'empty gestures' and 'grandstanding' are used to paint the SNP in a negative light without substantive argument.

“The people of Scotland deserve far better”

↑

Appeal to Prejudice · “The people of Scotland deserve far better”Why ›

The phrase 'the people of Scotland deserve far better' invokes in-group identity to position the speaker as the true representative of Scottish people against the current government.

Read the original ↗ · Open the full analysis →

↑ Back to the results

Analyzed 2026-08-30 04:01 UTC. Articles are sometimes updated after publication — if a quote here isn't in the current version, the piece has changed since.

Analyzed automatically with Semblen's fine-tuned model. These are rhetorical techniques, not political tilt — and finding one is not a claim that the article is false. Findings include language the outlet is quoting rather than asserting: we flag techniques wherever they appear, so check each quote against the original. The model has known false positives on strong-but-legitimate language, so treat each finding as a prompt to read closely, not a verdict. How articles are chosen →