Cox interviewed archaeologist Dr Assaad Seif in Lebanon. Seif noted that the Lebanese authorities had seized a number of antiquities coming out of Syria; among them were a dozen items each worth an estimated $1 million.
Yet Maupin seems to overlook this part of the report:
This despite the fact that in his investigation Cox only once sees any antiquities described as having been looted. These he views via a Skype meeting and are described as small figurines, glass vessels, bits of pottery and coins, acquired over a period of several months.Maupin also suggests that the movement of antiquities from their find-spots to the market place is "imaginary".
Cox falls into the trap of reporting on an (imaginary) international criminal network, operating in a shadow world of diggers, smugglers, middlemen and dealers.Cox, and producer Paul Grant, put together a carefully researched programme that explained how objects moved from Syria. Members of the programme team even attended a conference on Syria that was held at the British Academy so that they could hear the latest information.
Those of us in the UK value the professionalism of BBC journalists: rarely a day goes by at work without some discussion of a news piece on the BBC Today programme.
Maupin's post is itself 'sensationalist' and could be described as 'ill-informed'.
Is there another reason why Maupin want to discredit the BBC? Is he wanting to ensure the continuing movement of archaeological material from the Middle East to potential buyers?