Infectuous News Coverage

Anyone who follows the media coverage of cultural property issues has hopefully been inoculated against IAB (infectuous archaeological bias). A prime example of how twisted the coverage can get is shared with us by Associated Press in a June 3o, 2008 article by Maamoun Youssef titled "Egypt retrieves ancient relief in London" (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080630/egypt_antiquities.html?.v=1). The sub title is "Egypt retrieves a 2,500-year-old stone relief from Bonhams auction house in London", Here is Paragraph 1:

"CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- Egypt retrieved a 2,500-year-old limestone relief from London after its sale was blocked by Bonhams auction house because it had been looted from a pharaoh's tomb, Egypt's antiquities authority said Monday. A team of Egyptian archaeologists traveled to Britain to retrieve the artifact, which bears hieroglyphic text engraved in six rows and a cartouche of an ancient Egyptian queen, Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities said in a statement."

Now what sort of image does that conjure up? The only way I can read this is that Egypt's Supreme Archaeologist, Zahi Hawass, forced Bonhams to turn over an artifact that Egypt claims is looted. One might just stop reading at that point—and indeed many do. Anyone in public relations or advertising knows that the first paragraph is often your only shot at the reader. Well, I did read on and much to my surprise I find that it was actually a staff member at the Metropolitan Museum in New York who alerted Bonhams about the piece and it was Bonhams who voluntarily withdrew the item before the sale. Yes, it seems incredible doesn't it! The same Metropolitan Museum that is getting slammed almost daily it seems by archaeologists and retentionist nations is protecting the interests of Egypt—the most aggressive cultural property nationalist in the universe (well, alright, some might have other candidates for that position).

Couldn't AP have led the article with a headline like "Met helps Egypt reclaim looted relief"? Or, perhaps "Bonhams voluntarily repatriates relief to Egypt"? God forbid, a collector or member of the trade should be lauded for doing the right thing—even though they've been doing it for years. Why make a big to-do in paragraph one about a "team" of archaeologists going to London to "retrieve" the relief? It is pure and simple bias, mixed with a healthy dose of sensationalism and distortion—what we might expect from certain tabloids. It is, unfortunately, the modus operandi of many news desks these days who appear to have been brainwashed into thinking that there are only two kinds of people in the world of antiquities, Archaeologists and Looters. Frankly, as a journalist myself, I find this sort of thing repulsive and a disgrace to the profession. AP should be ashamed—but don't hold your breath looking for a counterpoint.

Actually, the most interesting part of the article was appended as an afterthought to this editorial hatchet job. The team of archaeologists also picked up two human skulls that had been found buried in the garden of a residence. I'll let you read the article to find out how they got to Britain in the first place!