Is ABC News Fear Mongering or Incompetent?

reply to post by BenReclused


Can I ask if you watched the video? I apologize that I didn't embed it - but it is available directly on the link.

The report was about a recent flash mob/rob of a convenience store. At the end of the report, in the only reference to the NRF report, the reporter says "The National Retail Federation now estimates that one in ten stores in this country has been the victim of a flash mob - this is really taking off."

How many stores are in this country - think about it. I found one online estimate that it was 2,877,548. That would mean, if the statistic spoken by the reporter was accurate, that over one quarter of a million stores had been flash mobbed.

If you have watched the clip, and still believe the information presented was valid, I would love to hear how.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by jdub297

 

You missed all the stores that did not have crimes. 79% of the crimes committed are multi-perpetrator, but what about all the stores that didn't report crimes?

And, even with their numbers, there is no way 10% of the multi-perpetrator crimes are done by flashmobs. I have not heard of a single flashmob in any of my surrounding communities. There are plenty of multi-perpetrator shoplifting crimes, but not a single flashmob.

Not 10%, not 1%, not even 1.

This is the exact quote from the OP:

Over three-quarters (79%) of retailers report being a victim of a multiple offender crime in the past 12 months

That is 79% of RETAILERS, not 79% of crime-victim retailers.

The second half of the quote from the OP source:

, some of these incidents (10%) involving flash mob tactics

Substitute the "79% of retailers" for " these incidents

You get: 10% of these 79% of retailers.

That is (in MSM-speak). "About 10" of retailers."

There is no other interpretation.

I am not vouching for the validity of the "79% of retailers".claim, or the "10% flash mob" specialties. I ddidn't do their survey.

By the way, as a former LEO, the son of an LEO, nephew of 2 LEOs and cousin of another, I can tell you that 100% of retailers will be crime victims over a 12 month period. I would not be surprised if 79% over a 12-month period experienced at least ONE multi-offender"crime. Why woulkd it be hard to believe that that of those 79% in one year, "about 10%" involved flash mobs? If that's true, then I don't see it a big exaggeration to turn that 8% into "about 10%.."
jw
.

reply to post by jdub297


I again believe that you have not watched the video of the on-air piece - which was what my concern was with. You are quoting the actual report to support the statistics in the report. My problem is not with the report or its estimates. It is with how the on-air piece misstated the report by saying:

"The National Retail Federation now estimates that one in ten stores in this country has been the victim of a flash mob - this is really taking off."

Just a quick question

Are these types of flash mob events resulting in robbing stores mainly happening in the US?

Originally posted by Ellen15
Just a quick question

Are these types of flash mob events resulting in robbing stores mainly happening in the US?

The looting in the UK recently was tied to social media organization as well.

reply to post by Open2Truth


No, I watched it from the very first.

The problem is statisitics. Over the course of a year, EVERY retailer will be a crime victim.
79% of ALL RETAILERS, OVER 1 YEAR, will experiemce at least ONE multi-offender crime.
10% of those will be mobs.

Would it make you feel better if the reporter said, "Over the course of a year, about 10% of all retail crimes will be done by a flash mob?"

Is that an improvement?

In MSM talk, the exaggeration gets the air time so long as the numbers are there to support the conclusion.
Did you think they report the truth?

I'm only trying to show you how the numbers can be used to support an airheadws interpretation of statistics.

reply to post by jdub297


Thanks for letting me know your comments were being made after seeing the video.

I agree that statistics can be confusing - especially when condensed and summarized briefly by someone. I will agree to disagree with you on this specific example - I don't think his statement would pass even an amateur editor's source check for accuracy.

I really do appreciate the opinion tho - that's why I posted the thread.

What's sad is not the flash mobs.
But, the fact that people don't realize, that they could flash mob, the government, the banks, the stock market.
If the corrupt government on this planet was "flash mobbed", it will be the same scenario as these flash mob attacks on retailers.

1. The biggest reason for using 1 in 10 instead of 1 in 12 is because 10 is an easier number for people to grasp. Not all people can handle even basic math. It's not the "lie" that bothers me, It's the support of a lack of education.

2. Sorry, I will never fear the term "Flash Mob" or the fact that one is forming without a really good reason: www.youtube.com...

3. There's a lot of store theft that goes unreported. We call it shrink, and it's why we do inventory twice a year. We're lucky that there's usually only the value of $50-$200 dollars off in our particular store, but then, we can mark most of it out the system before it goes to inventory because most theives leave us the empty containers, for some reason. So, yeah, if you're going to steal, please leave the wrapper. At least then we can identify what's been lost. About the only time any of this is reported to law enforcement is when they rob the register or we're absolutely positive as to who stole the merchandise in question (most likely to happen when it is an employee who is stealing).

reply to post by Open2Truth


Yes, I did, but I will try to explain in another way:
1) Let's use 100 stores (100%). That's 1 for each percentage point.
2) 79 (79%) of those stores are victims of multiple offender crimes
3) 10% (or 1/10) of those 79 stores (victims of multiple offender crimes) are the 7.9 stores (79/10=7.9) that were victims of flash mobs.
4) 7.9 stores IS:

"Approximately one in ten, or almost 10% of retail stores are affected by flash mobs"

I stated in my previous post:

Perhaps the reporter should have said, "Approximately one in ten, or almost 10% of retail stores are affected by flash mobs". That would have been an accurate statement!

I feel the OP, and many of you, are more in err than ABC was.

I'm stickin' to my story!

The math is easy... and the numbers don't lie!

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by Ellen15
Just a quick question

Are these types of flash mob events resulting in robbing stores mainly happening in the US?

Originally posted by Open2Truth
The looting in the UK recently was tied to social media organization as well.

Were the UK Riots orginally meant to be a flash mob event; ie creative dance/act and then organised to quickly spiral into looting and rioting?

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
What's sad is not the flash mobs.
But, the fact that people don't realize, that they could flash mob, the government, the banks, the stock market.

oOh like an organised protest?

oh my how scary!!!

reply to post by jdub297


Yep, it seems I misread it.

I still do not believe the 10% flashmob part though.

I have only heard about flashmobs on ATS. I don't know anybody in real life that has even heard of a flash mob, so there is no way it is affecting 10% of retailers. At least not in my area, or the other areas of the country where I have friends and family.

Originally posted by Ellen15

Originally posted by Ellen15
Just a quick question

Are these types of flash mob events resulting in robbing stores mainly happening in the US?

Originally posted by Open2Truth
The looting in the UK recently was tied to social media organization as well.

Were the UK Riots orginally meant to be a flash mob event; ie creative dance/act and then organised to quickly spiral into looting and rioting?

No, they were not. But the term "flash mob" has apparently morphed in the cultural lexicon, at least as far as the media is concerned, into any "mob" group activity, organized by social med. The "flash mob" term is now being used to describe by some what was briefly called "wildings."

We use to call them riots, lootings, robberies, etc., without emphasis on how they got together and organized their activities. But that really gets to the heart of my concern - I think adding the moniker, and making the story about the technology, has great downside potential for all of us.

Yes there is a lot of fear mongering on network mega-corp television. This is usually used as a tool to force thier agenda on use. scared people accept commands very consistantly. Scare people are easily controlled. Look at all the "[insert group] is a terrorist/extremist/radical" propaganda going on.


They want us to be scared. Why? Because scared people are easy to control and distract.

Oh, and why can't ABC news be both incompetent AND fear mongering? If you're fear mongering, you're showing a severe lack of restraint due to being incompetent for the job you've been put in position to do.

reply to post by Open2Truth


So it goes back to my original question lol

Are these types of flash mob events resulting in robbing stores mainly happening in the US?

It seems it is

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Maybe its possible that they are trying prepare us of whats to become more and more common. I know that the company I work for is worried about and takes flash mobs very seriously. We discussed it at the last meeting which is discussed at the link I posted .

But imo. I got 99 problems but a flash mob aint one at the moment,

reply to post by Ellen15


That certainly is my impression - and would make sense with our technological culture. However, I have learned that sometimes you really don't know what you don't know, so its only a guess.