FTC 17%

By SARAH RAZA The Associated Press0%

7/10/2026, 6:59:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Negativity Bias, and Self-Serving Bias, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 16.1% saturation with 75 hits. Analysis detected 746 faulty-reasoning hits from 467 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 32.7% and a BS Rank of 17% (18,213 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 83.20% of the article peer group.

It looks like John Deere owners can soon feel free to fix their own machines. 
The Federal Trade Commission and attorneys general from several states secured a right-to-repair settlement Wednesday with agriculture equipment giant Deere & Co. -- commonly known as John Deere -- that requires the company to let farmers and independent shops fix their own equipment. 
The Illinois-based manufacturer has faced complaints for years for withholding the software needed for repairs and forcing customers to use authorized dealers instead of independent ones. 
This marks the second right-to-repair settlement Deere has reached this year, following a separate $99 million class-action settlement with farmers in April. 
Though the class-action compensated consumers, the FTC's settlement instead requires Deere to make its repair services available to equipment owners and independent shops. 
The FTC and attorneys general from Arizona, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin brought the antitrust lawsuit in January 2025, arguing that Deere had illegally restricted farmers and independent shops that might otherwise service them from repairing farm equipment such as tractors. 
Deere also makes engines and equipment for forestry, landscaping and construction. 
Under the order filed in Illinois, Deere will now be required to make diagnostic and repair tools available to equipment owners and independent repair shops, not only its own network of authorized dealers. 
It also prevents Deere dealers from retaliating against equipment owners or repair shops who choose to fix their own equipment instead of paying for Deere's services. 
The order is headed to Judge Iain Johnston for his approval. 
"For too long, Arizona farmers and independent mechanics have been at the mercy of Deere's monopoly over repair tools, forced to wait -- and pay -- for authorized dealers just to fix broken tractors and other equipment," Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said in a statement Wednesday. 
Deere must pay $1 million collectively to the five states for antitrust enforcement costs and will be subject to strict compliance oversight for the next 10 years. 
In the complaint, the FTC argued that Deere provides a service software tool to authorized dealers but does not provide the full version to equipment owners or independent shops. 
Deere had said the lawsuit was baseless, denied that its distribution of service tools was anticompetitive and argued that it could not monopolize services since it does not directly provide them. 
Deere maintained its commitment to independent repair in a statement Wednesday, adding that the agreement with the FTC reinforces its innovation of more flexible repair options. 
"This is good news for our customers and for the future of how Deere equipment is supported," said Denver Caldwell, vice president of aftermarket and customer support. 
Right-to-repair has become an increasingly common issue over the years, especially for tech products, with consumers complaining that even simple repairs can only be done by company-authorized dealers. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.5%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 16.1%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 4.2%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 2.1%Availability Heuristic16.1%This article: 6.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 1.1%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic6.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 2.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 6.7%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 7.2%Framing Effect8.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 5.2%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 3.2%Optimism Bias9.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 2.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 15.6%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 11.8%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 10.1%Negativity Bias15.6%This article: 11.3%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 5.4%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 3.7%Self-Serving Bias11.3%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 4.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.7%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 3.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.6%Recency Bias10.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.4%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.4%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 2.2%Appeal to Authority2.4%This article: 5.6%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 1.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 2.7%False Dilemma5.6%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 6.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 3.8%Hasty Generalization6.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.8%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 7.8%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 7.6%Appeal to Emotion15.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 4.7%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.9%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 1.3%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.7%Anecdotal6.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 10.1%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 1.9%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)10.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 6.6%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 1.2%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.9%Special Pleading6.6%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 10.1%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 1.8%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.7%Unattributed Quote10.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.7%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 1.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 10.1%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 4.5%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 2.7%Biased Writer Voice10.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 12.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 0.0%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.6%Sarah Raza The Associated Press: 2.9%Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.6%

467 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers16%attributed speech393writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageKris Mayes • 47 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageDenver Caldwell • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Kris Mayes

100%flagged-word coverage
47 attributed words64% of attributed speech53% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kris Mayes: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kris Mayes: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -6.6 ptsWriter: 6.6%Kris Mayes: 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.