CEOs warn against fragmentation as global trade turns inward. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Unbalanced reporting

Presenting mainly one side of an issue while omitting or barely acknowledging other reasonable perspectives.

The article exclusively quotes and paraphrases two CEOs (Jerome Smalling and Frank James) who argue strongly for deeper regional integration as an economic necessity. Examples: - "Business leaders argue deeper regional integration is now an economic necessity..." - "We must remain focused on mitigating the negative effects of a potentially divided Caribbean." - "As global trade turns inward, Caribbean leaders say the region’s best defence lies in deeper integration — across capital, services and markets — rather than retreating into fragmented national responses." No space is given to policymakers, economists, small-business owners, labour groups, or others who might: - Question whether deeper integration is always beneficial, - Highlight potential downsides (e.g., loss of policy autonomy, adjustment costs), or - Argue that some degree of national protection or selective fragmentation can be advantageous. This creates an impression that there is a consensus and that the CEOs’ view is the only reasonable stance, even though the topic is contested in broader policy debates.

4 suggestions

Include at least one expert (e.g., an economist or policy analyst) who can outline potential risks or trade-offs of deeper regional integration, such as fiscal constraints, regulatory challenges, or distributional impacts.

Quote a policymaker or business representative who is more cautious about integration or who supports some targeted protectionist measures, and summarize their reasoning.

Add a short contextual paragraph noting that while many business leaders support integration, there is ongoing debate in the region about the pace, scope, and design of such integration, and briefly describe the main points on each side.

Rephrase the closing line to attribute the view clearly, e.g., change "Caribbean leaders say the region’s best defence lies in deeper integration" to "The business leaders speaking at the conference argued that the region’s best defence lies in deeper integration," making it clear this is not presented as a universal conclusion.

Unsubstantiated claims

Statements presented as fact or near-fact without supporting evidence, data, or clear attribution that would allow readers to evaluate them.

Several broad claims are made without data or specific examples: 1. "As global trade becomes more fragmented and protectionist pressures rise..." – This is a plausible macro description but is not supported with any figures, time trends, or references to specific policy changes. 2. "That warning is sharpened by changes in the global trade environment, where higher tariffs, remittance taxes and policy uncertainty are increasing the cost of cross-border transactions." – The article does not specify which tariffs or remittance taxes, how much they have increased, or provide any quantitative indication of cost increases. 3. "He added that demand for cross-border financial solutions is rising as businesses and households seek to manage risk and access opportunities across the region." – This is attributed to Smalling but is still a broad empirical claim with no supporting numbers or examples. 4. "Both executives said the Caribbean’s response to global uncertainty will shape its economic resilience over the next decade." – This is a general predictive statement without reference to any studies or scenarios. While these are not extreme or sensational, they are presented in a way that encourages acceptance without evidence.

4 suggestions

Where possible, add simple supporting data or references, e.g., mention a recent WTO, IMF, or regional report showing trends in tariffs, trade volumes, or remittance costs affecting the Caribbean.

Specify concrete examples of new tariffs or remittance taxes that have impacted Caribbean firms, including approximate magnitude or timing.

When presenting broad trend statements from the CEOs, make the attribution explicit and cautious, e.g., "Smalling said he is seeing rising demand for cross-border financial solutions among his clients" instead of a generalized factual statement.

For forward-looking claims about economic resilience, add a brief note that these are projections or opinions, and, if available, reference any regional economic outlooks that support or nuance these views.

Appeal to authority

Relying on the status or position of individuals (e.g., CEOs) to lend weight to arguments, without providing independent evidence or alternative viewpoints.

The article’s core argument—that deeper regional integration is an economic necessity and the best defence against global trade fragmentation—is carried almost entirely by the authority of two high-profile business leaders: - Jerome Smalling, chief executive of JMMB Bank - Frank James, group chief executive of GraceKennedy Examples: - "Business leaders argue deeper regional integration is now an economic necessity..." - "A unified Caribbean approach, with the free flow of capital, talent and services, is vital to the region’s growth and development." - "As global trade turns inward, Caribbean leaders say the region’s best defence lies in deeper integration..." The article does not provide independent empirical support or expert analysis beyond these authorities, nor does it show that their views are contested or corroborated by broader research. This can subtly encourage readers to accept the conclusions because of who is speaking rather than because of the strength of the evidence.

4 suggestions

Complement CEO quotes with references to independent research (e.g., studies by regional universities, CARICOM, ECLAC, or multilateral institutions) that either support or complicate the claim that deeper integration improves resilience.

Clarify that these are the perspectives of specific business leaders at a particular conference, not necessarily the unanimous view of all Caribbean leaders or economists.

Include at least one non-business voice (e.g., an academic economist, trade union representative, or small-business association) to provide context or a different angle, reducing reliance on corporate authority alone.

Rephrase summary sentences to emphasize that these are opinions, e.g., "The executives argued that..." instead of "The region’s best defence lies in..."

Oversimplification

Reducing a complex issue to a single cause, solution, or framing, without acknowledging important nuances or trade-offs.

The article tends to frame the policy choice as a relatively simple binary: deeper regional integration vs. fragmented national responses, with integration presented as clearly superior: - "We must remain focused on mitigating the negative effects of a potentially divided Caribbean." - "As global trade turns inward, Caribbean leaders say the region’s best defence lies in deeper integration — across capital, services and markets — rather than retreating into fragmented national responses." This framing: - Suggests that fragmentation is purely negative, without acknowledging that some targeted national policies or selective protection can sometimes be beneficial. - Implies that deeper integration is uniformly positive and necessary, without discussing potential costs (e.g., implementation challenges, unequal benefits among countries, short-term adjustment costs for certain sectors). The reality of regional integration and trade policy is more complex, involving multiple instruments, stages, and distributional effects.

4 suggestions

Add a brief paragraph acknowledging that while many business leaders see benefits in deeper integration, there are also challenges and trade-offs, such as harmonizing regulations, managing fiscal impacts, and ensuring smaller economies are not disadvantaged.

Avoid binary language like "best defence" vs. "retreating" and instead describe integration as one of several strategies, e.g., "a key strategy many leaders advocate" alongside domestic reforms and targeted risk management.

Include a sentence noting that some policymakers argue for a mix of regional integration and selective national measures to protect vulnerable sectors or maintain policy flexibility.

Clarify that the CEOs’ comments reflect a particular perspective shaped by their roles in large regional firms, which may differ from the experiences of smaller or more domestically focused businesses.