John Deere equipment owners now have the "right to repair" 39%

By Caitlin Tan0%

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

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Negativity Bias, and Anecdotal, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 27.1% saturation with 124 hits. Analysis detected 769 faulty-reasoning hits from 458 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 44.2% and a BS Rank of 39% (13,556 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 61.90% of the article peer group.

John Deere equipment owners now have the "right to repair" 
Under the settlement between Deere & Co., the FTC and several state attorneys general, consumers will be able to fix their the company’s products on their own instead of having to rely on authorized dealers. 
Agriculture by Caitlin Tan 
Tractors aren’t the only thing that manufacturers have made it hard to repair without proprietary parts - they reflect a broader battle. 
William Campbell/Getty Images 
The FTC and attorneys general for several states reached a settlement this week with the company that manufactures John Deere tractors to let farmers and independent shops fix their own equipment. 
Previously, they had to rely on authorized dealers, which increased the cost and wait time for repairs. 
Tractors aren’t the only thing that manufacturers have made it hard to repair without proprietary parts and know-how. 
The right to fix your own equipment has been a huge fight for years, and reflects an ongoing, broader battle in the U.S. 
“The McDonald’s ice cream machine, which is so famously broken  there’s a website dedicated (to it) called McBroken ,” said Nathan Proctor, senior campaign director for the consumers’ rights group PIRG. 
He said those ice cream machines are so often out of order because the manufacturer isn't eager to share the specific software codes needed to fix them. 
That was also the case for John Deere, up until the recent settlement. 
“Farmers may now get what they need to fix this equipment without having to go to the dealer if they don't want to,” Proctor said. 
It’s part of a movement called “right to repair,” which Gay Gordon-Byrne lobbies for as the executive director of the Repair Association. 
She says fixing your own stuff was simpler before the internet. 
“Manufacturers used to routinely package a whole repair manual in with the product,” she said. 
But eventually, many manufacturers stopped providing it at all. 
Instead, they required consumers to go to them  or shops they chose  to get the item fixed. 
Gordon-Byrne argued that created a monopoly of sorts. 
But Cleveland State University law professor Chris Sagers said that’s kind of the point. 
“The creator of a machine or something is supposed to have a little bit of control over their product,” he said. 
“That's the boon that we give to firms for innovating.” 
The John Deere settlement is part of an ongoing battle to determine how much control lies with the manufacturer and how much with the consumer. 
Stories You Might Like 
Why beef prices keep climbing 
This apple farmer in Washington is taking an axe to his trees to save money 
Rural veterinarian shortage is felt at small town Wyoming clinic 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.8%Caitlin Tan: 2.2%Marketplace: 2.2%Confirmation Bias2.8%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Caitlin Tan: 7.4%Marketplace: 7.4%Availability Heuristic7.0%This article: 8.7%Caitlin Tan: 2.2%Marketplace: 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic8.7%This article: 3.3%Caitlin Tan: 0.8%Marketplace: 0.8%Hindsight Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 24.9%Caitlin Tan: 9.5%Marketplace: 9.5%Framing Effect24.9%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.9%Marketplace: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.4%Caitlin Tan: 0.6%Marketplace: 0.6%Status Quo Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%Caitlin Tan: 1.9%Marketplace: 1.9%Optimism Bias7.6%This article: 2.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.5%Marketplace: 0.5%Pessimism Bias2.0%This article: 12.9%Caitlin Tan: 6.9%Marketplace: 6.9%Negativity Bias12.9%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 9.0%Caitlin Tan: 2.2%Marketplace: 2.2%Fundamental Attribution Error9.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.4%Caitlin Tan: 4.6%Marketplace: 4.6%Appeal to Authority9.4%This article: 5.5%Caitlin Tan: 1.4%Marketplace: 1.4%False Dilemma5.5%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.3%Caitlin Tan: 7.9%Marketplace: 7.9%Hasty Generalization8.3%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.5%Marketplace: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 5.9%Caitlin Tan: 4.4%Marketplace: 4.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.9%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 2.2%Caitlin Tan: 0.5%Marketplace: 0.5%Appeal to Nature2.2%This article: 2.8%Caitlin Tan: 0.7%Marketplace: 0.7%Composition/Division2.8%This article: 9.8%Caitlin Tan: 5.9%Marketplace: 5.9%Anecdotal9.8%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.7%Caitlin Tan: 0.4%Marketplace: 0.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.7%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 7.0%Caitlin Tan: 6.0%Marketplace: 6.0%Quote-first Misdirection7.0%This article: 27.1%Caitlin Tan: 6.8%Marketplace: 6.8%Biased Writer Voice27.1%This article: 0.9%Caitlin Tan: 0.2%Marketplace: 0.2%Indoctrination0.9%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caitlin Tan: 0.0%Marketplace: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Caitlin Tan: 1.7%Marketplace: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…6.8%

458 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers44%attributed speech257writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageCaitlin Tan • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWilliam Campbell/Getty Images • 3 words • 0.0% coverageFTC • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageNathan Proctor • 32 words • 100.0% coverageNathan Proctor • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageNathan Proctor • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageGay Gordon-Byrne • 11 words • 0.0% coverageGay Gordon-Byrne • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageGay Gordon-Byrne • 8 words • 0.0% coverageChris Sagers • 14 words • 0.0% coverageChris Sagers • 21 words • 0.0% coverageChris Sagers • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Nathan Proctor

100%flagged-word coverage
84 attributed words42% of attributed speech81% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Biased Writer Voice-48.2 ptsWriter: 48.2%Nathan Proctor: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+38.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%Nathan Proctor: 38.1%38.1%Indoctrination-1.6 ptsWriter: 1.6%Nathan Proctor: 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.