National Trust head says she received death threats

[bitchstewie]

I knew some people were a bit angry about what they perceived as the direction of the trust but what on earth is this all about

National Trust boss says she received death threats amid ‘woke’ row

[Johnnytheboy]

Pffft you're not doing your job right unless you get a few death threats.

[166 MM Barchetta]

Come on now, don’t down play this.
It’s almost perfect for Stewie and his weekly faux “ “

It’s the Guardian, it’s got middle class outrage, it mentions woke and it’s got slavery.

I think its a strong start to the year for stewie, this could go anywhere.
Fingers crossed we can get decent race baiting post by the end of the first page.
Definitely a “snowflake” comment, that’s nailed on.

[Johnnytheboy]

I did think it was a perfect kind of Stewie thread: start something like this, fish for "on the other hand" posts, then act all outraged.

[bitchstewie]

She runs the National Trust.

I didn't realise that thinking that receiving death threats for doing your job is messed up was a middle class thing.

Live and learn eh.

[Ridgemont]

Ah - I see the NT PR team are hard at work again.

Had a busy time last year smearing their opponents: good to see picking up after the holiday break.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/13/na...

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1466449/national...

https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/national-trust-calls...


The spectator summarises the ‘deathy threat’ perspective, the nub of which is that the NT has decided to cancel its own raison d’etre and much of its own estate:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/broken-trust-t...

Don’t ps off the English middle classes. Here endeth the lesson.

[Randy Winkman]

Ridgemont said:

Ah - I see the NT PR team are hard at work again.

Had a busy time last year smearing their opponents: good to see picking up after the holiday break.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/13/na...

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1466449/national...

https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/national-trust-calls...


The spectator summarises the ‘deathy threat’ perspective, the nub of which is that the NT has decided to cancel its own raison d’etre and much of its own estate:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/broken-trust-t...

Don’t ps off the English middle classes. Here endeth the lesson.

Charles Moore in the Spectator. I'd argue that's not going to be a very balanced summary. (Can't read the whole article mind.)

I know that the NT have upset some volunteers lately by possibly taking them for granted but I still don't know why some people seem to have such a problem with the NT being more open about the extent that slavery has played in Britain's past.

[markcoznottz]

166 MM Barchetta said:

Come on now, don’t down play this.
It’s almost perfect for Stewie and his weekly faux “ “

It’s the Guardian, it’s got middle class outrage, it mentions woke and it’s got slavery.

I think its a strong start to the year for stewie, this could go anywhere.
Fingers crossed we can get decent race baiting post by the end of the first page.
Definitely a “snowflake” comment, that’s nailed on.

You forgot ‘frothing’.

[bitchstewie]

It's an article posted in NP&E about a woman getting death threats simply for doing her job.

Do you chaps have a view on that or are you just here to moan?

Remind me who's all frothy snowflakey and outraged here to borrow a few of your own words

[Johnnytheboy]

You, by the look of things!

[bitchstewie]

Randy Winkman said:

Charles Moore in the Spectator. I'd argue that's not going to be a very balanced summary. (Can't read the whole article mind.)

I know that the NT have upset some volunteers lately by possibly taking them for granted but I still don't know why some people seem to have such a problem with the NT being more open about the extent that slavery has played in Britain's past.

Coincidentally I read today that apparently Charles Moore converted to Catholicism when the Church of England allowed women to be ordained as priests.

The campaign against the National Trust seems a bit odd as you'd think history isn't just about the good stuff but they're free to campaign obviously.

What I don't understand is the threats though it does seem to be the new thing that a few knuckle draggers resort to if an organisation doesn't do things they approve of (see the RNLI thread).

[Ridgemont]

Randy Winkman said:

Ridgemont said:

Ah - I see the NT PR team are hard at work again.

Had a busy time last year smearing their opponents: good to see picking up after the holiday break.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/13/na...

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1466449/national...

https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/national-trust-calls...


The spectator summarises the ‘deathy threat’ perspective, the nub of which is that the NT has decided to cancel its own raison d’etre and much of its own estate:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/broken-trust-t...

Don’t ps off the English middle classes. Here endeth the lesson.

Charles Moore in the Spectator. I'd argue that's not going to be a very balanced summary. (Can't read the whole article mind.)

I know that the NT have upset some volunteers lately by possibly taking them for granted but I still don't know why some people seem to have such a problem with the NT being more open about the extent that slavery has played in Britain's past.

I won’t quote willy nilly however this is a key line:

‘ In August, an internal paper attacked the very idea of country houses (‘the outdated mansion experience’) and their gardens. It called for the Trust to move from being ‘asset-led’ to ‘audience-led’, as if it were not the assets which attract the audience’.

Anyone who thinks the Trust isn’t precisely an asset led organisation, whose very existence depends on that appeal to its membership doesn’t have a clue what they are doing which is why Restore Trust is up in arms.

Turning the trust sideways by for example running participation events inviting visitors to recreate leaseholders eviction protests from a C18th lords estate (never happened), or deciding to install a giant white cube into the entry hall of a Wiltshire house under the title ‘Why do objects matter?’ Is crass and ahistorical. When this has been pointed out to the exec they have doubled down and slashed the number of expert staff who look after these locations while hiring 1000s of additional ‘curators’ to look after and present these weird modern installations that largely have little relevance as to why visitors and members visit these houses. It’s completely crass and, from the votes at the AGM last year at least 62% of the individual members (as opposed to corporate associates etc) agreed.

The rank and file membership feels like the NT is happy to take their membership fees and then ignore its opinions re the revisionist approach it takes to its own estate.

[Ridgemont]

bhstewie said:

What I don't understand is the threats though it does seem to be the new thing that a few knuckle draggers resort to if an organisation doesn't do things they approve of (see the RNLI thread).

I treat her comments with some scepticism.

‘The head of the National Trust has said she received anonymous death threats during a “culture war” row over the organisation’s perceived “wokeness”.

Hilary McGrady, the NT’s director general, said she did not report the intimidation to the police as “it comes with the territory”.’

Receiving a neatly typed letter of outrage from Mrs Trellis stating she hoped she choked to death on her chocolate bourbons is hardly the same as the NF posting pictures of your family... if it was serious the police *should* have been involved.

[Nick Pappagiorgio]

Reading the first 2 lines of the OP article as follows (my underlining)...

"The head of the National Trust has said she received anonymous death threats during a “culture war” row over the organisation’s perceived “wokeness”.

Hilary McGrady, the NT’s director general, said she did not report the intimidation to the police as “it comes with the territory”


I made a conscious decision some time ago that if reports of "death threats", "hate", "racism" etc are good enough for a PR effort to get some sympathy, but are NOT somehow serious enough for reporting to the police, then a big giant pinch of salt is required, and the claimant goes in my folder marked "giant bull-stter"

See also:
"Humza Yousaf"
"David Lammy"

(edited to note that Ridgemont above beat me to essentially the same point)

Edited by Nick Pappagiorgio on Monday 3rd January 17:31

Edited by Nick Pappagiorgio on Monday 3rd January 17:44

[buggalugs]

I note the G doesn't directly quote her saying she got death threats, just paraphrases her. It would be interesting to hear her exact words. Nevertheless I can well imagine a few nutjobs would have been on the case having been stirred up by the NT's actions and direction recently.

One thing that irks me about the whole thing is that these objects, properties and land were donated to the NT by people presumably on the understanding they'd be looked after as part of our history, heritage and identity and the NT accepted them. Only to turn around and start questioning if objects matter and putting 'so-and-so did a bad thing once so should we really enjoy this any more' posters up in the entrance.

Does Italy have interpretation boards around the Colosseum explaining how guilty everyone should feel about slaves being made to fight to the death? (maybe they do, I haven't been )

It's like the NT completely forgot what they do, why they do it and who they do it for.

[rxe]

Anybody with a reasonable public profile gets weird stuff in the post. I happen to know a household name “celeb”, I have no idea whether they are considered A-list, but everyone reading this will know this individual. They get tonnes of mail from utter fruit loops. Generally the theme is “I want to marry you, but I will resort to killing you if you don’t marry me”. The handwriting and grammar suggest they are written by a mentally retarded child. Apparently a lot of film sets have a “death threat board” where the most amusing examples received by the cast are posted.

[Gareth79]

Ridgemont said:

I won’t quote willy nilly however this is a key line:

‘ In August, an internal paper attacked the very idea of country houses (‘the outdated mansion experience’) and their gardens. It called for the Trust to move from being ‘asset-led’ to ‘audience-led’, as if it were not the assets which attract the audience’.

Anyone who thinks the Trust isn’t precisely an asset led organisation, whose very existence depends on that appeal to its membership doesn’t have a clue what they are doing which is why Restore Trust is up in arms.

The original aims of the NT was to provide open space for the public to enjoy, not preserve country estates that the owners could not longer afford. That was mostly a post-war thing.

A lot of NT members aren't really interested in the detailed history of the houses, they want to wander through the rooms and grounds and sip tea, but not wanting to be made to think too hard about how it was all paid for, or how the servants and employees were treated (it was not like Downtown Abbey)

[Ridgemont]

buggalugs said:

Does Italy have interpretation boards around the Colosseum explaining how guilty everyone should feel about slaves being made to fight to the death? (maybe they do, I haven't been )

It's like the NT completely forgot what they do, why they do it and who they do it for.

No they don’t: they have a large number of out of work male actors dressed up as Roman centurions asking the female tourists whether or not they would like a photo with Biggus Dickus.

I guess we could try the same thing here and get a bunch of foppy drama students to pretend to be Colin Firth stumbling out of the manor lake in his unmentionables.

[Ridgemont]

Gareth79 said:

The original aims of the NT was to provide open space for the public to enjoy, not preserve country estates that the owners could not longer afford. That was mostly a post-war thing.

A lot of NT members aren't really interested in the detailed history of the houses, they want to wander through the rooms and grounds and sip tea, but not wanting to be made to think too hard about how it was all paid for, or how the servants and employees were treated (it was not like Downtown Abbey)

Yes and it worked. It’s a good thing. The NT hit an all time high of 6 million members before covid & this crap landed. People like parks. They are there for a nice day out and not a bleeding lecture about how awful their greatnth grandparents were.

[Randy Winkman]

Gareth79 said:

Ridgemont said:

I won’t quote willy nilly however this is a key line:

‘ In August, an internal paper attacked the very idea of country houses (‘the outdated mansion experience’) and their gardens. It called for the Trust to move from being ‘asset-led’ to ‘audience-led’, as if it were not the assets which attract the audience’.

Anyone who thinks the Trust isn’t precisely an asset led organisation, whose very existence depends on that appeal to its membership doesn’t have a clue what they are doing which is why Restore Trust is up in arms.

The original aims of the NT was to provide open space for the public to enjoy, not preserve country estates that the owners could not longer afford. That was mostly a post-war thing.

A lot of NT members aren't really interested in the detailed history of the houses, they want to wander through the rooms and grounds and sip tea, but not wanting to be made to think too hard about how it was all paid for, or how the servants and employees were treated (it was not like Downtown Abbey)

If they don't want to read the information boards or the guide book they wont care what it says on them.