‘I never mentioned it for 25 years. I didn’t want to be a victim of the bomb’: Hiroshima survivor Koko Kondo on horror, anger and forgiveness 3%

By Simon Hattenstone14%

7/25/2026, 3:58:40 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 4 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Quote-first Misdirection, and Appeal to Emotion, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 11.4% saturation with 35 hits. Analysis detected 58 faulty-reasoning hits from 308 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 13.5% and a BS Rank of 3% (21,401 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 97.80% of the article peer group.

On that fateful day in 1945, Kondo was just a baby in her mother’s arms. 
She talks about her father’s newly discovered eye-witness account of the aftermath  and why she decided to continue his work as a peace campaigner 
 ‘Everywhere there were pitifully injured people’: read an extract from Kiyoshi Tanimoto’s memoir 
Koko Kondo holds up a tiny salmon-pink dress. 
“This is what I was wearing,” she says. 
The dress, with its white-ribboned collar, is in perfect condition. 
A miracle. 
On 6 August 1945, Koko was eight months old and crawling on a tatami mat at the family parsonage. 
Mrs Takaki, a member of the church, had just popped round to have a chat with Chisa, Koko’s mother. 
Chisa gathered Koko up in her arms so she wouldn’t be a distraction, and they stood by the door. 
It was 8.15am; a serene summer day in Hiroshima. 
That was when the uranium-fuelled atom bomb, named Little Boy by the Americans, was dropped. 
The most deadly bomb in history. 
Koko and Chisa were buried in the rubble, unable to move. 
The parsonage roof had crashed down on them. 
For 40 years, Chisa couldn’t bear to tell Koko about the day, the pink dress, and how they survived. 
It was too painful. 
Today, 81 years on, Koko is talking to me via video link. 
She is an elegant woman with a kind face and a vertiginous silver quiff. 
She speaks quietly in perfect English, then surprises you by stamping on a word fiercely to make her point. 
The virtual background to her screen is the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park, which was built on ground zero, the point directly underneath where the bomb exploded. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.6%the Guardian: 3.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.7%the Guardian: 3.1%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.9%the Guardian: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.3%the Guardian: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.4%the Guardian: 6.1%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.5%the Guardian: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.2%the Guardian: 2.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 6.7%the Guardian: 10.4%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.2%the Guardian: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.6%the Guardian: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.2%the Guardian: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Simon Hattenstone: 2.3%the Guardian: 3.2%Halo Effect4.5%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.2%the Guardian: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.2%the Guardian: 2.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 4.6%the Guardian: 3.8%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.2%the Guardian: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.1%the Guardian: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 2.3%the Guardian: 6.3%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.6%Simon Hattenstone: 6.0%the Guardian: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.6%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.9%the Guardian: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.7%the Guardian: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.6%the Guardian: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 1.8%the Guardian: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.5%the Guardian: 1.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.3%Simon Hattenstone: 0.9%the Guardian: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection2.3%This article: 11.4%Simon Hattenstone: 2.4%the Guardian: 10.4%Biased Writer Voice11.4%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 4.9%the Guardian: 1.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 3.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Simon Hattenstone: 0.4%the Guardian: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

308 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers16%attributed speech260writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Koko Kondo • 7 words • 100.0% coverageKoko Kondo • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageKiyoshi Tanimoto • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageKoko Kondo • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Koko Kondo

21%flagged-word coverage
34 attributed words71% of attributed speech13% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Quote-first Misdirection+20.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Koko Kondo: 20.6%20.6%Biased Writer Voice-13.5 ptsWriter: 13.5%Koko Kondo: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.