Contextomy

I was wondering whether this can be classified as a contextomy. This fallacy is committed when passages are quoted out of context. What if facts or arguments are criticized while their contexts are ignored. Is this a contextomy? 

Thanks a lot. 

Contextomy is removing a passage from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning. If a fact is a fact then "criticizing" it means nothing... like yelling at a block of cheese for being cheese. No use complaining that a circle has no corners—in any context. So let's stick with arguments. "Context" can by synonymous with the problems of the ambiguity fallacy and equivocation . A concept or term in the argument can mean one thing in a premise (i.e. in that context) and something else in the conclusion. This is where what we might call "context" matters—we would need to have a clear understanding of what the arguer means.

If you do provide an example, we can perhaps be more helpful.

Not contextomy, but, inter alia, a major lack of understanding of economics and business and an appeal to emotion. The Appeal to Emotion fallacy is an attempt to manipulate emotions rather than the use of valid reasoning.