BS Summary: This article contains 13 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Framing Effect, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 35% saturation with 134 hits. Analysis detected 662 faulty-reasoning hits from 383 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 45.6% and a BS Rank of 41% (12,272 of 20,497 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 59.90% of the article peer group.

More than half of Latin Americans deported from US to Congo are now back home 
DAKAR, Senegal (AP)  More than half of the 15 Latin Americans deported in April to Congo under the Trump administration’s widely criticized crackdown on migrants have returned to their countries of origin, the Congolese government and one of their lawyers said Friday. 
U.S. immigration judges have ruled they were likely to face persecution back home. 
Congo is one of at least eight African nations with which the U.S. has struck third-country deportation deals. 
Under a series of often-secret agreements, the Trump administration has deported thousands of people to nearly two dozen countries that are not their own, advocates say. 
Immigration lawyers said the administration uses deportations to third countries as a legal loophole to indirectly force asylum seekers back to their home countries. 
Alma David, a U.S.-based attorney representing one of the 15 migrants, said eight deportees have returned to their home countries in recent weeks. 
Her client, a Colombian woman who had described her conditions and uncertainty in Congo in an interview with The Associated Press, currently remains in the central African country, she said. 
The IOM has said assisted voluntary returns are “strictly voluntary and based on free, prior and informed consent.” 
They returned via the IOM’s Assisted Voluntary Return program, in which the IOM covers travel costs and logistics for migrants who consent to go back to their home countries, as an alternative to forced deportation. 
The lawyer said the migrants had been granted protections against removal to their home country by U.S. federal courts, which ruled they were likely to face persecution if they returned. 
“The fact that they chose to return there anyway raises serious concerns that they likely felt backed into a corner because no viable alternative was presented to them,” David said. 
Also still in Congos is fellow Colombian, Adriana Maria Quiroz Zapata, despite a federal judge ordering the Trump administration last month to bring her back to the U.S. 
She was deported to Congo even though it had refused to accept her because it could not care for her medical needs. 
——- 
Associated Press writer Saleh Mwanamilongo in Bonn, Germany contributed to this report. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.1%Mark Banchereau: 3.5%AP News: 2.0%Confirmation Bias14.1%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.7%Mark Banchereau: 1.4%AP News: 2.7%Availability Heuristic4.7%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.3%AP News: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.0%Mark Banchereau: 10.3%AP News: 8.0%Framing Effect17.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.8%AP News: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 4.6%AP News: 2.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 7.8%Mark Banchereau: 5.9%AP News: 2.0%Pessimism Bias7.8%This article: 35.0%Mark Banchereau: 10.9%AP News: 9.6%Negativity Bias35.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 3.5%AP News: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.8%AP News: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 1.9%AP News: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 1.4%AP News: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 3.3%AP News: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 33.2%Mark Banchereau: 6.5%AP News: 3.7%Appeal to Authority33.2%This article: 9.1%Mark Banchereau: 2.5%AP News: 1.2%False Dilemma9.1%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 13.6%Mark Banchereau: 4.7%AP News: 2.5%Hasty Generalization13.6%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.8%Mark Banchereau: 4.4%AP News: 4.7%Appeal to Emotion6.8%This article: 7.8%Mark Banchereau: 0.7%AP News: 0.6%Begging the Question7.8%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 2.6%AP News: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 1.5%AP News: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.9%AP News: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.8%Mark Banchereau: 1.6%AP News: 1.2%Anecdotal7.8%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 1.5%AP News: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 11.2%Mark Banchereau: 1.4%AP News: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)11.2%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.7%Mark Banchereau: 0.8%AP News: 2.0%Unattributed Quote4.7%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 1.4%AP News: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 4.9%AP News: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 5.2%AP News: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.0%AP News: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mark Banchereau: 0.8%AP News: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

383 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers34%attributed speech252writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageAlma David • 23 words • 0.0% coverageAlma David • 30 words • 0.0% coverageIOM • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageAlma David • 30 words • 0.0% coverageAlma David • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

IOM

100%flagged-word coverage
18 attributed words14% of attributed speech95% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%IOM: 100.0%100.0%

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.