A tragic incident occurred in Karnataka when a 50-year-old biker, Anil Ruzario, lost his life after a tree branch fell on him during heavy rainfall. The accident took place on the Chikkamagaluru-Balehonnur Road at around 10:30 a.m. Despite being rushed to the government hospital in Balehonnur, he succumbed to his injuries.

In a separate event, a 100-year-old woman named Siddamma died when the wall of a house collapsed during heavy rains in Adugadi village near Kusmi in Shivamogga taluk. She was visiting relatives when the wall fell on her while she was asleep. Two others were injured in that incident.

The heavy rains have also caused significant disruptions across various regions, including road closures due to landslips and fallen trees affecting power lines and transportation routes. Authorities have advised residents to stay updated through trusted local sources for ongoing weather conditions and safety information.

Original article

The provided text is a news report on two tragic incidents that occurred in Karnataka due to heavy rainfall. At first glance, the text appears to be a neutral and factual account of the events. However, upon closer examination, several biases and language manipulations become apparent.

One of the most striking biases in the text is its framing of the incidents as "tragic" and "accidental." This language creates an emotional response in the reader, evoking sympathy for the victims and their families. The use of words like "tragic" and "accidental" also implies that these events were unfortunate but unavoidable, rather than highlighting any potential systemic or structural issues that may have contributed to them. This framing suppresses any critical examination of how such incidents might be prevented in the future.

Furthermore, the text presents a clear narrative bias by focusing on individual victims rather than exploring broader societal or environmental factors that may have contributed to these incidents. The fact that two separate incidents occurred within a short period highlights a larger issue with infrastructure or emergency preparedness in Karnataka. However, this context is not explored in the article, which instead focuses on individual stories of loss and tragedy.

The language used also exhibits economic bias by implying that residents should rely on "trusted local sources" for information about weather conditions and safety updates. This phrase assumes that local authorities are reliable sources of information, without questioning their credibility or accountability. In reality, local authorities may have their own interests or agendas that influence their communication with residents.

In terms of cultural bias, there is an implicit assumption about what constitutes a significant disruption to daily life. The article mentions road closures due to landslips and fallen trees affecting power lines and transportation routes as significant disruptions. However, this framing assumes that these disruptions are primarily inconvenient for urban dwellers who rely on cars for transportation. It does not consider how rural communities might experience different types of disruptions or challenges during heavy rainfall.

Additionally, there is no mention of any attempts by authorities to mitigate these effects or provide support to affected communities beyond advising residents to stay updated through trusted local sources. This omission suppresses discussion about systemic failures or inadequate preparedness measures.

The use of passive constructions also obscures agency in certain parts of the article. For example, when describing how Anil Ruzario lost his life after being hit by a tree branch during heavy rainfall," it says "he succumbed to his injuries." This phrasing shifts attention away from potential human error or negligence towards more general circumstances (heavy rainfall). Similarly when describing Siddamma's death it says she was visiting relatives when 'the wall fell' implying it was just an accident without considering possible structural issues with houses built near rivers which could be exacerbated by heavy rains

Moreover there's no mention if any action has been taken against those responsible for building houses near rivers which could indicate some form institutional bias protecting builders over citizens

Furthermore ,the selection bias can be seen where only two specific cases are highlighted out many who suffered from similar incidents .This selective reporting can create an impression among readers about what constitutes newsworthy event .It also raises questions about why certain cases were chosen over others

Lastly ,the temporal bias can be seen where past experiences aren't considered while discussing current situation .For instance ,there's no mention if similar situations have occurred before during monsoon season .This lack consideration shows presentism where only current situation matters without learning from past experiences