In Media making up the mob: Journalists amid protesters in Ferguson, Mo. in the Washington Post, it's claimed there's as many media staff as protestors in Ferguson:

Early Wednesday, Lowery estimated that the size of the group protesting and the media covering it was about even — between 100 and 150 of each.

This claim is repeated in the summary text for a tweet linking to the article.

Is it true?

closed as off-topic by Sklivvz Aug 20 '14 at 16:42

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions about unresolved current events and issues currently under investigation by a court of law, government, or other similar investigative body are off-topic because there is insufficient data for a meaningful answer. For more information, see Handling current news questions." – Sklivvz
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • That could easily be true for that specific time period. Reports (from the NY Times, for instance) say that a peaceful demonstration ended some time before midnight. In addition, the police made 47 arrests "late Tuesday". It stands to reason the remaining crowd "early Wednesday" was smaller than usual. – Is Begot Aug 20 '14 at 14:34
  • What is the basis for being skeptical of this claim? – user5341 Aug 20 '14 at 14:42
  • 1
    @DVK do you mean doubtful? Because we should apply skepticism to every claim. – user5582 Aug 20 '14 at 15:30
  • It wouldn't be the first time. I've seen Dutch media reporting "massive public interest" in some royal event, where journalists outnumbered citizens 5-to-1. – gerrit Aug 20 '14 at 15:58
  • @gerrit - surely you won't begrudge our masters from the 4th estate the right to be called "public" when they see feet to pretend to the title? – user5341 Aug 20 '14 at 16:45

Browse other questions tagged .