This fallacy occurs when one brings in irrelevant information to distract audience from an issue under discussion (as if the irrelevant information has helped to resolve the issue).

Let’s examine the following example:

What follows is a summary of the arguments in the video:

Leadership: The staff members complain about working remotely and ask for better support. They should consider themselves lucky to have this online option. We did not even have the option when we started working in the field.


Let’s analyze the arguments. You have two attempts to complete each item.

* 1. What is the arguer’s claim? (Please select the best answer.)

  A. The staff members complain about working remotely and ask for better support.

  B. They should consider themselves lucky to have this online option.

  C. We did not even have the option when we started working in the field.



* 2. What is the reason that the leaders use to support their position? (Please select the best answer.)

  A. The staff members complain about working remotely and ask for better support.

  B. They should consider themselves lucky to have this online option.

  C. We did not even have the option when we started working in the field.



Let’s review the leadership’s argument and present it in standard format:

  Premise/ reason: We did not even have the option when we started working in the field.

  Claim/ position: They (the staff) should consider themselves lucky to have this online option.

The leaders’ previous work experience is not relevant to the original issue. The issue under discussion should be the support for which the staff ask, not the leaders’ previous work experience.