# "Twenty-five pieces is not the same as 170,000" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 2, 2003, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602 "2003-05-02T12:35:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/41 "2003-05-03T21:20:05Z")
> [@](#): > > Liberals “difinitive answers” always lie in the future. Whereas conservative’s definitive answers are always “lies in the present”, such as Saddam’s WMD, or his connection with Al Qaeda. And this isn’t a case of 170,000 = 25, it’s (Enough to threaten the security of America) = 0. ---
**Author:** ![Spite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/76d3ee/32.png) [@Spite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spite)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/42 "2003-05-03T21:24:23Z")
Well **Squink** , it seems those that we put in charge of such distinctions disagree with you 100%. So your little comparisson seems childish and disingenuous doesn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/43 "2003-05-03T21:46:50Z")
**Spite** , what if the people who were put in charge of such distinctions are the ones who are childish and disingenuous? That’s certainly the way it looks to a lot of us… ---
**Author:** ![Monster104](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Monster104](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monster104)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/44 "2003-05-03T21:58:05Z")
> [@](#): > > The New York Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch. I trust the reliability of this source about as much as I trust Fox News, which is not at all. Their credibility is zero. I love how you ignore and throw out a source of information simply because of who owns the company. :rolleyes: Your credibility is even less than the embedded reporters, because YOU AREN’T THERE. So, rather than ignore something, why don’t you come up with a valid reason other than “I don’t like what that says, so it’s wrong”? ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/45 "2003-05-03T22:09:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > A person who expresses his negative views about acts committed or planned to be committed by his government, in a representative democracy, is not being unpatriotic but the reverse. Fine, but that’s a separate topic from media bias. > [@](#): > > The fact remains, spokesmen for the museum came out with the 170,000 estimate – and may have exaggerated some. …There seems to be little question that looters did remove a fair number of historical artifacts from the museum, whatever their motives - Yes, I would assume that the 170,000 figure came from some museum official. Should the media have known that it was exaggerated? Should they at least have known that it was uncertain? Should they have communicated the uncertainty of the figure? I don’t know enough to say. But, the fact remains that they started a bit of a firestorm, which may well not have been justified. > [@](#): > > If someone burglarized your house, could you identify every artifact that might have been removed. …Where are those lists kept, if you have them – what if they’re stored in your home and the burglars burned them? That’s a fair analogy, except for three things. – I am not a professional collector. – If I were uncertain about the extent of the theft, I’d say I was uncertain. – If 170,000 my possessions had been stolen, I think I could identify a lot more than 29 of them right off the top of my head. > [@](#): > > We’ve discussed at length the slants carried by staff of various news sources, “embedded” journalists, and so on – if you can’t see grounds for a legitimate balance between perspectives, I pity you. Reporting slant is what we’re talking about. One way to measure it is in organizational and personal predispositions. Murdoch-owned media are apt to be pro-Bush and pro-Iraq war. Much other media are apt to be the opposite. Another way to measure slant is compare reporting with actual facts, once they become known. E.g., Fox News’s upbeat reporting during the war looked like chauvinism, but it turned out to be accurated. The war did go better than many expected. In the case of the museum looting, those who reported 170,000 pieces taken turned out to be too pessimistic. We didn’t know that at the time, but we pretty much know it now. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/46 "2003-05-03T22:22:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monster104 \* > I love how you ignore and throw out a source of information simply because of who owns the company. :rolleyes: > > Your credibility is even less than the embedded reporters, because YOU AREN’T THERE. So, rather than ignore something, why don’t you come up with a valid reason other than “I don’t like what that says, so it’s wrong”? Wait a second…The whole claim behind this article as far as I read it is “The other reporters are all getting it wrong and here is what the truth really is…” and now you are accusing us of being selective about our sources of information? Likewise, the OP’s assertion is that the press reporting is biased against the U.S. This is, for the most part, mind you, the U.S. press reporting that, as far as I understand it, is far more sympathetic to the U.S. point of view than most of the foreign reporting. When I listen to conservatives complain about the reporting in the U.S. and world press (except for the few they like), I am reminded of the joke about the mother watching a military parade and commenting, “Look, everybody is out of step but my Johnny!” ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2003, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/47 "2003-05-04T07:07:43Z")
> [@](#): > > For 15 years, the three al-Ani brothers have run a taxi business from their adjacent houses, opposite the local school. It was a nice place to live, recalls Raid al-Hati, their neighbour and cousin, a quiet part of town. > > The brothers shared one vehicle. ‘It was a living,’ said Osama, now in hospital and rasping through the pain of gunshot injuries to his head and side. > > The family has been torn to shreds after their homes were sprayed by American gunfire during an incident that represents a turning point in the invasion of Iraq, as hostility to the US military intensifies. > > A crowd gathered outside the al-Ani’s house last week, demanding that the Americans leave the school over the road so that children can return. \*\*The military opened fire, killing 13 and wounding some 35; they claimed they were shot at first. > > But even if shots were aimed at them, the response was not only into the crowd; they pummelled the street, house by house, with a mighty volley and shot at occupants as they appeared in doorways.\*\* > > Each of the brothers came out in turn to try and help their families and were each targeted and shot. Walid was killed and the two others wounded, along with their mother, Mufina, and her daughter-in-law, Eptisan al-Ani. In a few minutes, said Eptisan’s husband, Muthana, now in the hospital bed opposite his brother, ‘our family is destroyed’. > > The family taxi is in Osama’s front yard, looking like a cheese-grater - 38 rounds to the metalwork alone. After Osama was hit, the Americans spirited it away into the schoolyard. It was retrieved by al-Hati on Friday. > > \*\*Fallujah is now festooned with banners in Arabic and English reading: ‘Go Out From Our City. If Refuse We Will Kill You. Because You Are Come Here For Petrol Not for Freedom.’ \*\* [The Guardian](http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,949043,00.html) So, which story sounds more plausible, **Monster**? This one, or the fluffy feel good piece in The Post? Because by _all accounts_ we know the incidents in Fallujah that left all those dead and wounded are factual, whereas there’s precious little in The Post’s article by the _embed_, that can be corroborated off-site. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2003, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/48 "2003-05-04T07:46:40Z")
> [@](#): > > For 15 years, the three al-Ani brothers have run a taxi business from their adjacent houses, opposite the local school. It was a nice place to live, recalls Raid al-Hati, their neighbour and cousin, a quiet part of town. > > The brothers shared one vehicle. ‘It was a living,’ said Osama, now in hospital and rasping through the pain of gunshot injuries to his head and side. > > The family has been torn to shreds after their homes were sprayed by American gunfire during an incident that represents a turning point in the invasion of Iraq, as hostility to the US military intensifies. > > A crowd gathered outside the al-Ani’s house last week, demanding that the Americans leave the school over the road so that children can return. \*\*The military opened fire, killing 13 and wounding some 35; they claimed they were shot at first. > > But even if shots were aimed at them, the response was not only into the crowd; they pummelled the street, house by house, with a mighty volley and shot at occupants as they appeared in doorways.\*\* > > Each of the brothers came out in turn to try and help their families and were each targeted and shot. Walid was killed and the two others wounded, along with their mother, Mufina, and her daughter-in-law, Eptisan al-Ani. In a few minutes, said Eptisan’s husband, Muthana, now in the hospital bed opposite his brother, ‘our family is destroyed’. > > The family taxi is in Osama’s front yard, looking like a cheese-grater - 38 rounds to the metalwork alone. After Osama was hit, the Americans spirited it away into the schoolyard. It was retrieved by al-Hati on Friday. > > \*\*Fallujah is now festooned with banners in Arabic and English reading: ‘Go Out From Our City. If Refuse We Will Kill You. Because You Are Come Here For Petrol Not for Freedom.’ \*\* [The Guardian](http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,949043,00.html) So, which story sounds more plausible, **Monster**? This one, or the fluffy feel good piece in The Post? Because by _all accounts_ we know the incidents in Fallujah that left all those dead and wounded are factual, whereas there’s precious little in The Post’s article by the _embed_, that can be corroborated off-site. ---
**Author:** ![Ogre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ecb155/32.png) [@Ogre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ogre)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2003, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/49 "2003-05-07T23:08:26Z")
Frankly, since the Guardian has historically been almost rabidly anti-American, I have no problem at all believing that they could make shit up, or at least leaving out important information…like the reports that the US troops were fired upon first, by AK-47 fire from the crowd and from rooftops. Granted, they acknowledge the possibility, but only in the most perfunctory way. > [@](#): > > But even if shots were aimed at them, the response was not only into the crowd; they pummelled the street, house by house, with a mighty volley and shot at occupants as they appeared in doorways. If they were fired at from the street, as [some reports](http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030501-75776021.htm) specify, then their response was justified. In any case, I question the fairness of the report. Was the reporter there at the incident? He doesn’t specify where the info about the “mighty volley.” ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/50 "2003-05-08T00:23:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*Fine, but that’s a separate topic from media bias. Yes, I would assume that the 170,000 figure came from some museum official. Should the media have known that it was exaggerated? Should they at least have known that it was uncertain? Should they have communicated the uncertainty of the figure? I don’t know enough to say. But, the fact remains that they started a bit of a firestorm, which may well not have been justified. That’s a fair analogy, except for three things. > > – I am not a professional collector. > – If I were uncertain about the extent of the theft, I’d say I was uncertain. > – If 170,000 my possessions had been stolen, I think I could identify a lot more than 29 of them right off the top of my head. Reporting slant is what we’re talking about. One way to measure it is in organizational and personal predispositions. Murdoch-owned media are apt to be pro-Bush and pro-Iraq war. Much other media are apt to be the opposite. > > \ > > In the case of the museum looting, those who reported 170,000 pieces taken turned out to be too pessimistic. We didn’t know that at the time, but we pretty much know it now. \*\* The museum in which I work is a relatively small one, but we probably have around 250,000 artifacts in our collection, most of which are not fully and correctly documented. It’s been open for over 100 years, acquiring items, but has only gotten a professionally trained staff and modern record-keeping methods within the past 15. We’re working on documenting everything now, but it’s a job which will take at least three lifetimes. If my muesum were looted, we’d have a \* hell \* of a time. This is why I question the validty of arguments that the looting was not “that bad.” First of all, what is the standard for “confirming” an artifact is missing? Do you need to have the records to prove that it was there in the first place? If it happened in my museum, I would know that a Serves vase was missing from a case in the porcelain exhibit, but might not have the documents to prove the item was there. If that is the standard of “confirmation” the task could be impossible. What if only a fraction of their artifacts were properly cateloged? What if records are missing? If this is the case, they might only be able to \* prove \* 29 artifacts missing as of right now, because those were the “big fish” which were fully documented. As time goes by the numbers could skyrocket. They’re looking at empty rooms, knowing that hundreds of items are gone, but unable to \* confirm \* each item is missing. If looting happened in my museum, we, the staff, would have to sit down, and go off of memory of what was in each room to make inventory lists, if what records we have were destroyed. I could probably name a few hundred artifacts that we have in our collection, and I’m sure the Iraqi curators can as well. It’s that pesky “confirmation” that’s the trouble. And what should we make of a pile of dust and chips which might have once been a clay pot? If the artifact were pulverized beyond recognition, do we list it as “destoryed” guessing that that’s what made the pile of debris, or do we classify it as “missing?” Remember, too, that the main Baghdad museum was not the only one which was looted. If anything, I’d guess that the 170,000 figure is low in terms of actual loss nation-wide. ---
**Author:** ![cheddarsnax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cheddarsnax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cheddarsnax)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/51 "2003-05-08T00:36:48Z")
I only have time to answer one question… 1. No. Why would they? _If_ the reactions were not appropriate, then they were still based on information that at the time was believed to be true. Expecting an apology in a situation like that is like expecting an apology from someone for getting all upset over someone killing 20 people, then finding out that only 2 were killed. There’s still a loss, and at based on the information available at the time their amount of outrage was certainly justified. ---
**Author:** ![MLS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MLS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MLS)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602/52 "2003-05-08T02:04:04Z")
Just in case it matters to anyone: [Iraq National Museum Artifacts Recovered](http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030507/ap_on_en_ot/iraq_museum_looting_6) > [@](#): > > By JONATHAN D. SALANT, Associated Press Writer > > WASHINGTON - U.S. authorities have recovered almost 40,000 manuscripts and 700 artifacts that were missing from the National Museum in Baghdad, officials said Wednesday. > [@](#): > > …many items originally thought looted had actually been placed in hidden vaults for protection before the Iraq war began, and other items were returned once agents talked of amnesty and potential rewards. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twenty-five-pieces-is-not-the-same-as-170-000/172602.md?page=2)