Missourians protest data center conference and warn officials: 'We will remove them from office' 48%

By Sarah Kellogg38%

6/18/2026, 7:15:54 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 30 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Indoctrination, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 37.7% saturation with 257 hits. Analysis detected 1,650 faulty-reasoning hits from 681 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.9% and a BS Rank of 48% (11,551 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 52.80% of the article peer group.

Preceding a data center summit in Jefferson City, roughly 100 Missourians gathered on Wednesday to rally against the development and construction of the centers across the state. 
Protesters lined up along Oil Well Road, where cars had to drive by to reach the data center summit held at the Capitol Bluffs Center. 
The summit, labeled as an education event, was limited to members of the Missouri Association of Counties, Missouri Municipal League and the Missouri School Boards' Association. 
Vendors, corporate partners and the public were not allowed to participate, which angered opponents of the centers. 
"Even though the people who live, work, and farm at the front lines of these industrial invasions have the most at stake," said Olivia Stockman with the Missouri Rural Crisis Center. 
Protesters chanted, waved at passersby and listened to the series of speeches given by people who would be affected by data centers from all parts of the state. 
They included Gabe Cotton of Festus, where citizens in April voted to oust four city council members who were in favor of a data center and have attempted to recall three other members as well as the mayor. 
"They are only digging their hole deeper, and we will remove them from office. 
This has and will continue to be an ongoing battle, and we will keep winning, because our community refuses to sit down," Cotton said. 
He added that Festus doesn't have to be an anomaly when it comes to pushing back against data centers. 
"The story of Festus is the story of any small town fighting a well-funded industrial monster that is working to harm it. 
You have the power to stop it," Cotton said. 
Another area of the state seeing pushback to data center development is Joplin. 
Speaking to the crowd, resident Brenna Bower said she has watched her community come together to fight data center development. 
"The people who live, farm and work at the front lines of these massive industrial encroachments deserve to have their voices heard. 
They have the most at stake, and they have a right to know what the impact would be for their communities, natural resources, farmland, and economic livelihoods," Bower said. 
The rally was held shortly after Amazon announced the building of a multibillion-dollar data center in Montgomery County. 
Harry Cope, who is running for presiding commissioner of Montgomery County, said corporations are underpaying what they should in taxes for these data centers. 
"We probably can't stop them, but for God's sakes, at least make them contribute their fair share," Cope said. 
Protecting Missouri's environment, including water resources, was on the minds of many attendees. 
KJ McDonald, of Joplin, said her top priority is protecting Missouri's water, which would be threatened by large use at data centers. 
"In southwest Missouri, we have been on the verge of drought for many years. 
We've actually just barely moved out of the fear of drought recently," McDonald said. 
McDonald said the centers need more public input. 
"There are definitely people who see the value in needing to have data centers clearly. 
We have a lot of technology that we use in our day-to-day lives, and there is necessary infrastructure for that," McDonald said. 
"But everybody believes that this was pushed through really quickly without very much public input." 
Elyse Schaeffer, with the Missouri Coalition for the Environment, said that without proper regulations, data centers will cause issues for Missouri's water, electric and human resources. 
"We stand here today, nearly a mile from the shore of one of our state's many great rivers, the Missouri River itself, our state's water resources are under attack by tech billionaires who want to literally suck Missouri dry." 
Schaeffer also mentioned St. 
Charles, which has a permanent moratorium on large-scale data centers. 
"We did it here in Missouri. 
This is the Show-Me State and to data center developers, we say 'Show us you can do it right or do not do it at all,'" Schaeffer said. 
Copyright 2026 St. 
Louis Public Radio 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.7%Sarah Kellogg: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias10.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 1.5%Sarah Kellogg: 1.5%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic1.5%This article: 2.8%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic2.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Sarah Kellogg: 7.4%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect6.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.2%Sarah Kellogg: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias3.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%Sarah Kellogg: 3.7%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias4.8%This article: 10.1%Sarah Kellogg: 2.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias10.1%This article: 37.7%Sarah Kellogg: 4.2%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias37.7%This article: 7.8%Sarah Kellogg: 2.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias7.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 7.8%Sarah Kellogg: 1.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias7.8%This article: 3.2%Sarah Kellogg: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.1%Sarah Kellogg: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias2.1%This article: 0.9%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.9%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.1%Sarah Kellogg: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority2.1%This article: 4.1%Sarah Kellogg: 1.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma4.1%This article: 5.6%Sarah Kellogg: 1.4%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope5.6%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.2%Sarah Kellogg: 3.5%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization8.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.2%Sarah Kellogg: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon2.2%This article: 27.2%Sarah Kellogg: 9.4%Columbia Missourian: 5.2%Appeal to Emotion27.2%This article: 4.3%Sarah Kellogg: 1.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question4.3%This article: 13.2%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)13.2%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 8.7%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof8.7%This article: 5.7%Sarah Kellogg: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature5.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 12.9%Sarah Kellogg: 2.6%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal12.9%This article: 3.2%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman3.2%This article: 7.9%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.9%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.1%Sarah Kellogg: 1.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection2.1%This article: 19.1%Sarah Kellogg: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice19.1%This article: 13.5%Sarah Kellogg: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination13.5%This article: 3.5%Sarah Kellogg: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Kellogg: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

681 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers65%attributed speech239writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageOlivia Stockman • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageGabe Cotton • 14 words • 100.0% coverageGabe Cotton • 24 words • 100.0% coverageGabe Cotton • 19 words • 0.0% coverageGabe Cotton • 22 words • 100.0% coverageGabe Cotton • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageBrenna Bower • 20 words • 0.0% coverageBrenna Bower • 22 words • 100.0% coverageBrenna Bower • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageHarry Cope • 24 words • 100.0% coverageHarry Cope • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageKJ McDonald • 22 words • 0.0% coverageKJ McDonald • 14 words • 0.0% coverageKJ McDonald • 14 words • 0.0% coverageKJ McDonald • 8 words • 0.0% coverageKJ McDonald • 15 words • 0.0% coverageKJ McDonald • 22 words • 0.0% coverageKJ McDonald • 15 words • 0.0% coverageElyse Schaeffer • 26 words • 0.0% coverageElyse Schaeffer • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageElyse Schaeffer • 6 words • 0.0% coverageElyse Schaeffer • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Gabe Cotton

100%flagged-word coverage
88 attributed words20% of attributed speech41% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Biased Writer Voice+46.4 ptsWriter: 5.9%Gabe Cotton: 52.3%52.3%Indoctrination+26.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%Gabe Cotton: 26.1%26.1%Quote-first Misdirection-5.9 ptsWriter: 5.9%Gabe Cotton: 0.0%0.0%

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.