Attempt to address a persistent journalist's factoid: Donna Yates and Neil Brodie, The illicit trade in antiquities is not the world's third-largest illicit trade: a critical evaluation of a factoid Antiquity 29 June 2023 Apparently it gous back 50 years:
"The authors find that the claim is not based on any original research or statistics, and it does not originate with any competent authorities. The analysis demonstrates how the uncritical repetition of unsubstantiated ‘facts’ can undermine legitimate efforts to prevent looting, trafficking and illicit sale of antiquities".What it does is help clueless journalists pad out their texts with some tasty snippet that looks like 'inside knowledge' when, as so often the case, the've not got a clue what they are writing about.
Larry Rothfield comments "Agree completely that people should stop saying this, and that academics should never have said it. But I am not yet convinced that its circulation in the press and use by politicians did more harm than good, since the article does not examine what, if any, good it may have done", which I think is a good point.
.A quibble, is it the "illicit trade in antiquities" or the trade in illict antiquities? The problem is that while antiquities can be licitly traded in country X, while being previously illcitly acquired in foreign country Y.
No comments:
Post a Comment