MP demands supermarkets and councils tackle ‘out of control’ trolley problem. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Sensationalism

Use of dramatic or exaggerated language to make the issue seem more extreme or alarming than the evidence clearly supports.

Phrases such as: - "these rogue carts are now a national problem, clogging footpaths, posing safety risks, and, critically, creating a commercial headache for businesses while silently eroding the appeal of our neighbourhoods." - "the issue has become so pervasive" - "out of control" - "The abandoned shopping trolley is more than an inconvenience; it’s a symptom of a larger issue affecting our safety, environment, and the very fabric of our neighbourhoods." These formulations heighten drama and scale without providing proportional, comparative data (e.g., relative to other urban issues or safety risks).

4 suggestions

Replace "rogue carts are now a national problem" with a more measured description such as: "abandoned shopping trolleys have become a recurring issue reported across multiple Australian states."

Change "out of control" to a more specific, verifiable description, e.g.: "remain a persistent problem in some areas despite existing measures."

Modify "silently eroding the appeal of our neighbourhoods" to: "can negatively affect the appearance of local streets and shopping areas."

Change "affecting our safety, environment, and the very fabric of our neighbourhoods" to: "have implications for safety, the environment, and local amenity, according to some community members and officials."

Appeal to emotion

Using emotionally charged wording and imagery to persuade readers rather than relying solely on neutral facts and balanced analysis.

Examples include: - "familiar and frustrating sight" - "rogue carts" - "silently eroding the appeal of our neighbourhoods" - "The abandoned shopping trolley is more than an inconvenience; it’s a symptom of a larger issue affecting our safety, environment, and the very fabric of our neighbourhoods." These phrases are designed to evoke frustration, concern, and a sense of threat to community identity, beyond what the presented data alone establishes.

4 suggestions

Replace "familiar and frustrating sight" with a neutral description such as: "a common sight in many suburbs."

Avoid anthropomorphizing language like "rogue carts" and instead use "abandoned trolleys" or "uncollected trolleys."

Rephrase "silently eroding the appeal of our neighbourhoods" to: "can detract from the visual appeal of local streets."

Change the concluding sentence to something like: "Abandoned shopping trolleys can affect safety, the environment, and local amenity, prompting calls for coordinated action from supermarkets, councils, and community members."

Unbalanced reporting

Presenting one side’s perspective in detail while giving little or no space to other relevant viewpoints.

The article extensively quotes and paraphrases Maryborough MP John Barounis and Snap Send Solve CEO Danny Gorog, and it supports their framing with data from the Snap Send Solve platform. In contrast: - Supermarkets are described as having "largely remained silent" and Aldi is briefly mentioned as claiming it "wasn’t a problem for them," but no direct quotes, data, or explanations from Coles, Woolworths, or Aldi are provided. - Councils are mentioned as needing to "step up" and as having introduced fines, but there is no council spokesperson or data on enforcement challenges, costs, or existing efforts. - Shoppers’ or community members’ perspectives (including those who may rely on trolleys to transport groceries home) are not represented. This creates a narrative where responsibility and blame are placed mainly on supermarkets and councils without giving them a chance to explain constraints, existing measures, or alternative views.

4 suggestions

Include direct responses or statements from major supermarkets (e.g., Coles, Woolworths, Aldi) explaining their current trolley management systems, costs, and any pilot programs or technological solutions.

Add comments from at least one local council representative about enforcement, resource limitations, and existing or planned initiatives.

Incorporate perspectives from community members, including those who see trolleys as a nuisance and those who may use them due to lack of transport, to show the social context more fully.

Explicitly note where attempts to obtain comment from supermarkets or councils were unsuccessful, rather than simply stating they "remained silent."

Selective use of sources / Cherry-picking data

Relying on a narrow set of sources or data that support one narrative while not presenting other relevant data or context.

The article relies heavily on data from the Snap Send Solve platform: - "Last year alone, the scale of the problem was laid bare, with more than 1.5 million reports of community issues made to local councils via the Snap Send Solve platform. Among the most significant grievances, particularly in rural areas, were abandoned trolleys." - "Snap, Send, Solve data reveals that by October last year, more than 136,000 trolleys had been abandoned across the country." However, it does not provide: - Comparative data from councils, police, or other reporting systems. - Context on what proportion of the 1.5 million reports were trolley-related. - Any data on trends relative to other urban issues (e.g., illegal dumping, vandalism) to justify calling it a "national problem" or "out of control." This can overstate the relative importance of trolley dumping by focusing on one dataset from a platform whose CEO is also quoted advocating action.

4 suggestions

Provide the percentage of the 1.5 million reports that relate specifically to trolleys, and compare that to other categories of complaints.

Include data from independent or government sources (e.g., council records, waste management reports) to corroborate or contextualize the Snap Send Solve figures.

Clarify that the 136,000 figure is based on reports to a specific app and may not capture all incidents or may reflect reporting behavior rather than absolute prevalence.

Explicitly state any limitations of the data (e.g., geographic coverage, user demographics, potential reporting bias).

Unsubstantiated claims

Statements presented as fact without sufficient evidence or quantification in the article.

Examples include: - "these rogue carts are now a national problem" – no comparative or trend data is provided to show national scale relative to other issues. - "The issue has become so pervasive" – "pervasive" is not quantified. - "Major supermarkets like Coles and Woolworths have largely remained silent on the issue, and Aldi claimed it wasn’t a problem for them, but the data unequivocally tells a different story." – The article does not show what Coles and Woolworths have or haven’t said, nor does it explain Aldi’s claim in detail. The word "unequivocally" overstates the conclusiveness of the data. - "They pose a real safety risk" and "contributed to flooding risks" – plausible, but no statistics, case examples, or expert assessments are provided to substantiate the scale of these risks.

4 suggestions

Qualify "national problem" with data, e.g.: "have been reported in all states and territories, according to Snap Send Solve data, suggesting the issue is widespread."

Replace "pervasive" with a more precise description, such as: "commonly reported in multiple regions, particularly in rural areas, according to the platform’s data."

Change "the data unequivocally tells a different story" to: "the data from Snap Send Solve suggests that abandoned trolleys remain an issue in areas where these retailers operate."

Support safety and flooding claims with specific examples (e.g., incident reports, council statements, or expert commentary) or soften the language to: "can pose safety risks" and "may contribute to flooding risks, according to local officials."

Biased language / Framing effect

Word choices and framing that implicitly assign blame or moral judgment, nudging readers toward a particular interpretation.

Biased or loaded phrases include: - "rogue carts" – anthropomorphizes trolleys and implies misbehavior. - "one fed-up local MP" – frames the MP as a relatable champion of public frustration. - "Supermarkets and other stores need to take accountability" – presented without balancing context about existing efforts. - "Major supermarkets like Coles and Woolworths have largely remained silent on the issue" – suggests negligence without evidence of outreach attempts or partial responses. - "Thankfully, some proactive measures are already being trialled" – "thankfully" signals approval of certain approaches. These choices subtly position supermarkets and councils as lagging or irresponsible, and the MP and Snap Send Solve as responsible problem-solvers.

5 suggestions

Replace "rogue carts" with neutral terms like "abandoned trolleys."

Change "one fed-up local MP" to: "a local MP" or "Maryborough MP John Barounis."

Rephrase "Supermarkets and other stores need to take accountability" as: "Barounis argues that supermarkets and other stores should take greater responsibility for managing their trolleys."

Modify "have largely remained silent on the issue" to: "did not respond to requests for comment by publication time" (if true) or specify what public statements exist.

Remove evaluative adverbs like "thankfully" and instead describe measures neutrally, e.g.: "Some measures are already being trialled, such as…"

Confirmation bias / Narrative fallacy

Selecting and arranging information to fit a pre-set narrative (trolleys as a major, escalating national problem caused by insufficient supermarket and council action) without exploring alternative explanations or counter-evidence.

The article builds a coherent story: abandoned trolleys are a growing national problem; an MP and a reporting app highlight the issue; data from that app confirms it; supermarkets and councils are not doing enough; a few innovative solutions show what should be done. Missing elements include: - Any evidence that trolley numbers have decreased significantly in some areas or that existing measures are working. - Discussion of other contributing factors (e.g., lack of public transport, socio-economic issues, vandalism) that might explain trolley abandonment. - Consideration of costs, feasibility, or unintended consequences of stricter enforcement or new systems. By omitting these, the article reinforces a single, problem-escalation narrative.

4 suggestions

Include data or expert commentary on trends over time, including any areas where trolley abandonment has decreased or been effectively managed.

Discuss potential underlying causes of trolley abandonment beyond retailer behavior, such as transport access, urban design, or social factors.

Present any evidence or arguments from retailers or councils about measures already in place (e.g., coin locks, wheel locks, collection contractors) and their effectiveness or limitations.

Acknowledge uncertainties, e.g.: "While the exact causes of trolley abandonment vary and are not fully understood, advocates argue that…"

Oversimplification

Reducing a complex issue with multiple causes and stakeholders to a simple problem with a straightforward solution.

The article concludes: - "It’s time for supermarkets, councils, and the community to unite, embrace smart solutions, and reclaim our streets from this pervasive commercial and community challenge." Throughout, it largely frames the issue as one of supermarkets and councils needing to "step up" and enforce or adopt solutions, without exploring: - The diversity of local conditions (urban vs rural, socio-economic differences). - Trade-offs between costs, convenience, and enforcement. - The role of individual behavior and broader infrastructure (e.g., public transport, housing proximity to shops).

3 suggestions

Acknowledge complexity in the conclusion, e.g.: "Addressing abandoned trolleys is likely to require a mix of retailer initiatives, council policies, and community cooperation, tailored to local conditions."

Briefly mention different types of solutions (technological, regulatory, social) and note that their effectiveness can vary by area.

Avoid implying that "smart solutions" alone will solve the problem; instead, state that they "may help reduce" or "could contribute to reducing" trolley abandonment.