The arithmetic for one report
Florida Offers Blueprint For Other States To Shutter Islamist Terrorist Orgs Like CAIR
52High density of flagged expressions
What was read
911 words in the outlet's own voice, plus 13 in the headline. 16% of the text is in quotes, with 2 listed words inside quotes. 7 attribution markers (such as "said" or "according to") found.
Listed words inside quotes (not scored; quoting is reporting, but which quotes to use is an editorial choice): terrorist
, terrorist
.
Scare quotes (a phrase of one to three words in quotation marks with no speaker in the same sentence): 1993 Philadelphia Meeting
, CAIR Plaza
, The Long Game
. Since method 3.1.0 their words count as the outlet's own.
Words found
- In the headline:
terrorist
3 points Contentious label
Other States To Shutter Islamist Terrorist Orgs Like CAIR - Word choice:
interestingly
2 points Editorializing
the footsteps of Texas and, interestingly , the United Arab Emirates (UAE) beforeterrorist
3 points Contentious label
order that designated CAIR a terrorist organization, making it susceptible to executiveclaimed
1 point Expression of doubt
due process protections, something they claimed as a U.S.-based organization. By theterrorist
3 points Contentious label
2026, DeSantis had reaffirmed the terrorist designation , CAIR’s lawsuit had beencontroversial
1 point Contentious label
appeal. For now, however, the controversial Muslim group is done in theclaimed
1 point Expression of doubt
that CAIR, which has always claimed to eschew foreign funding of anyextremist
attributed to a speaker, not counted Contentious label
of George Washington University’s latest extremist studies is called The Long Game - Raises the temperature:
massive
1 point Raises the temperature
is unsurprising. He’s been a massive thorn in the organization’s side fortotally
1 point Raises the temperature
an organization that hasn’t been totally honest about its funding and goals.
Layer scores
Rates are counted points per 1,000 words of the story's own text. For a story longer than 200 words, the rate used is the average of the whole-story rate and the rate in its densest 200-word stretch, so neutral filler cannot dilute a loaded passage away. Score = 100 × (loaded end − rate used) ÷ loaded end, kept between 0 and 100. Headline words count only in the headline layer.
| Layer | Points | Words | Whole-story rate | Densest 200 words | Rate used | Scale | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Word choice | 11 | 911 | 12.1 | 50.0 (words 51 to 250) | 31.0 | 0 to 40 | 22 |
| Temperature | 2 | 911 | 2.2 | 5.0 (words 1 to 200) | 3.6 | 0 to 40 | 91 |
| Flagged attribution phrases | 0 | 911 | 0.0 | 0.0 (words 1 to 200) | 0.0 | 0 to 20 | 100 |
| Headline wording | 3 | 25 | 120.0 | headline only | 120.0 | 0 to 240 | 50 |
Densest stretch: Word choice, words 51 to 250 of 911, with interestingly
, terrorist
, claimed
, terrorist
, controversial
; Temperature, words 1 to 200 of 911, with massive
.
Shown, not scored: the headline's rate minus the rate of the story's first 80 words is 217.9 points per 1,000 words. Experimental: 1 of 4 names and figures in the headline also appear in the text read.
Overall
Weighted geometric mean of the layers that are established, with 10 added to each layer first and taken away at the end: (Word choice 22 + 10)0.4 × (Temperature 91 + 10)0.3 × (Flagged attribution phrases 100 + 10)0.2 × (Headline wording 50 + 10)0.1 − 10 = 52. Adding 10 means one layer at 0 lowers the total steeply without collapsing it. A weak layer pulls the total down.
Lowered the score most: Word choice.
Name-swap test: with party, politician and institution names swapped, this report's score moves by 0.0 points.
What a reader could check
| People named as sources | 0 |
|---|---|
| Unnamed sources | 0 |
| Links to primary records (government, court, filings, PDFs) | 4 www.judiciary.senate.gov, www.justice.gov, gov.texas.gov, extremism.gwu.edu |
| Documents cited in the text (a report, bill, ruling, filing) | 0 |
| Checkable specifics (numbers and dates) | 16 |
| Data shown (a table or chart) | no |
| Correction or clarification noted | no |
What a reader could check, counted by published patterns. Shown beside the score, never part of it. How each count works
Checked against the official record
No vote count or bill number found in the text read.
Record of this measurement
Method 3.1.0, word-list fingerprint 807a17189402a416, read by text extractor version 4. Fingerprint of the text read: d32dd71a1fd5bb08. Internet Archive copy nearest the time it was read. The text read was not kept (read before method 3.1.0, or from the feed only), so a later rule change can be applied only while the report is still in the outlet's feed.