NZX 50 closes above 14k for first time as oil prices dip. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Appeal to authority

Relying on expert opinions to shape interpretation of events or data.

The article quotes market and economic experts to interpret data: 1) “'It feels a bit more stable today – the big test comes overnight with Nvidia,' said Mark Lister, investment director at Craigs Investment Partners. 'In the last 14 quarters, they’ve beaten expectations in 13 of those.'” 2) “Bevan Graham, an economist at Salt Funds Management, said the Australian inflation reading was an ugly print. 'Given the RBA's hawkish comments on the upside risks to inflation and willingness to respond, this increases the prospect of a further rate hike from the RBA,' Graham said in a note. 'That said, I don’t think they’ll jump the gun and go as early as the September meeting.'” These are standard, transparent uses of expert commentary in financial reporting. The experts are clearly named with their affiliations, and their views are presented as opinions, not as unquestionable facts. This is a mild, non-manipulative form of appeal to authority, but it is the closest relevant technique present.

3 suggestions

Explicitly label expert comments as opinions or interpretations, e.g., “Mark Lister interpreted the day’s trading as…” or “In Bevan Graham’s view, the inflation reading was…”

Where possible, briefly note that other analysts may hold different views, even if not quoted, to signal that these are not the only interpretations.

Add a short, neutral explanation of the underlying data (e.g., what specifically made the inflation reading ‘ugly’ in numerical terms) so readers can evaluate the expert’s characterization themselves.

Appeal to emotion / mildly loaded language (in quoted speech)

Using emotionally charged or evaluative wording that can influence readers’ perceptions, even when embedded in quotes.

The phrase: “Bevan Graham, an economist at Salt Funds Management, said the Australian inflation reading was an ugly print.” “Ugly print” is a colloquial, mildly emotive characterization of the inflation data. However, it is clearly attributed to a named economist and not presented as the reporter’s own description. The rest of the article uses neutral, technical language.

3 suggestions

Paraphrase the emotive phrase into more neutral language while retaining the quote for color, e.g., “...said the Australian inflation reading was weaker than desired, calling it ‘an ugly print.’”

Add a brief numerical description of the inflation data (e.g., the actual rate and how much it exceeded forecasts) so readers can judge the severity without relying on the emotional label.

Ensure that such emotive characterizations are balanced with clear factual context, which is largely already done in this article.