There could not have been 200,000 people at Kirk's memorial as State Farm Stadium only seats 70,000 and there is not room for 130,000 overflow of people. Correct?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Was this fact-check helpful?
1. Summary of the results
The claim that there could not have been 200,000 people at Kirk's memorial due to the seating capacity of State Farm Stadium and lack of room for overflow is inconclusive. According to [1], the event is expected to draw a crowd as large as 100,000 people, which is below the claimed 200,000 attendees [1]. Similarly, [2] estimates the number of attendees to be around 100,000, with 70,000 in the stadium, 10,000 in the overflow site, and 10,000 in the Westgate area, which contradicts the claim of 200,000 people at Kirk's memorial [2]. However, [3] reports that over 200,000 people responded online to attend the memorial, and while the stadium's capacity is 63,000, it can be expanded to over 73,000, and the nearby Desert Diamond Arena will serve as overflow, accommodating an additional 19,000 people [3]. Other sources, such as [4] and [5], describe the crowd as "tens of thousands" but do not provide a specific attendance figure [4] [5].
2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints
A key piece of missing context is the total capacity of the venue and overflow areas, including the nearby Desert Diamond Arena, which can accommodate an additional 19,000 people [3]. Another important consideration is the number of people who responded online to attend the memorial, with [3] reporting over 200,000 responses [3]. Alternative viewpoints include the possibility that the event's organizers have made provisions for a larger crowd, such as the use of overflow areas [3], and that the crowd size may have been larger than the stadium's seating capacity due to standing room or outdoor viewing areas [2]. Additionally, [1] mentions that the stadium's capacity for its largest events is up to 73,000 people, which could be relevant to the discussion [1].
3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement
The original statement may be misleading due to its assumption that the stadium's seating capacity is the only factor in determining the total attendance [1] [2]. The statement also ignores the possibility of overflow areas and standing room or outdoor viewing areas, which could increase the total attendance beyond the stadium's seating capacity [3] [2]. Furthermore, the statement may be biased towards downplaying the size of the crowd, as it only considers the stadium's seating capacity and does not take into account the total capacity of the venue and overflow areas [3]. The sources that report lower attendance figures, such as [1] and [2], may benefit from downplaying the crowd size, while sources that report larger crowds, such as [3], may benefit from emphasizing the size of the crowd [1] [2] [3].