These stats come out of an industry that knowingly lied to get more more press and lobbying for arresting shoplifters by just outright saying that all lost products were attributed to shoplifting when in reality its a small percent of those.
It may be 45% of their ‘losses from shoplifting’ are food but ‘45% of shoplifters’ is an unknowable number They can project that based on caught shoplifters but even those caught are likely to have lifted certain things security is watching for. Putting an unknowable piece of info in the title is a good indicator the article is likely based on a lot of faulty assumptions.
These stats come out of an industry that knowingly lied to get more more press and lobbying for arresting shoplifters by just outright saying that all lost products were attributed to shoplifting when in reality its a small percent of those.
It may be 45% of their ‘losses from shoplifting’ are food but ‘45% of shoplifters’ is an unknowable number They can project that based on caught shoplifters but even those caught are likely to have lifted certain things security is watching for. Putting an unknowable piece of info in the title is a good indicator the article is likely based on a lot of faulty assumptions.
This is not untrue, but your syntactical error is not semantics.