Spectator National Trust Lies BUSTED

The tsunami of exaggeration and invention that is the mostly confected “culture war”, and indeed the “war on woke”, has thus far had the unswerving support of one publication above all others, and that is the increasingly alt-right Spectator magazine. Sad to say, though, in being thus supportive, a few of those expedient exaggerations have slipped out.

Moore and bigger whoppers by Himself Personally Now

Which brings us to the sad decline of one Charles Hilary Moore, an alleged peer of the realm, and a former editor of the increasingly desperate and downmarket Telegraph, its Sunday sister paper, and indeed the Speccy, whose National Trust hatchet job in the latter publication has caused his trousers to spontaneously combust in no style at all.

“According to a current National Trust employee, who naturally remains anonymous: ‘At interviews people are asked how they voted in the Brexit referendum, and rejected out of hand if they voted to leave’” he claims. The “source” continues “There is an atmosphere of fear and bullying - not, as the upper echelons in the Trust would like to believe, among downtrodden minorities, but among anyone who holds a view opposed to the neo-Marxist model prevalent in the organisation”. How convenient for the Speccy. And there is more.

“Since the Trust’s ‘Prejudice and Pride’ initiative [an (sic) campaign to ‘showcase’ gay connections with the Trust], they have been in cahoots with Stonewall, whereby ‘LGBTQ allies’ are recruited to spy on and weed out anyone who thinks, speaks or acts in an ‘unacceptable’ way”. And then there is Moore’s moderately wacko summing up.

“In studying how wokery took over the Trust (and many other cultural bodies, notably museums), I think the key to it lies in staff recruitment and HR. It is the 2020s equivalent of the hard-left penetration of trade unions in the 1970s”. The NT, having perused Moore’s drivel, has concluded “This isn't correct. These allegations are without evidence or foundation, and some are plain ludicrous. We’ve asked for a retraction from the Spectator”.

But after Jim Pickard of the FT had observed “of all that things that have never happened this has to be quite high up”, Evan Harris, who you can tell as he’s a doctor, had bad news: “Pointless exercise … Because IPSO is a press lapdog, not watchdog, and is run by a former Tory minister. It takes months to find a loop-hole for the publication or organise a tiny ‘buried’ correction with no apology”. IPSO will do next to nothing. As usual.

The only way to gain redress would be to instruct lawyers, but here a problem enters. The National Trust does not have the wherewithal to splash its cash on lawsuits, and this is factored into Moore’s trotting out yet another Spectator whopper. It’s why charitable organisations are such a favourite target for less principled organs of the press.

Indeed, such is the Speccy’s alt-right mindset that their Twitter feed recently quoted Lionel Shriver (an immigrant) telling “This is purely anecdotal, but in my formerly white, working-class neighbourhood of south London, the proportion of Africans on the streets is high. In the 11 years we’ve lived there, that proportion has palpably risen”.

Sam Freedman observed “The Spectator actually deleted this nasty bit of racism (though the article containing it remains on their site). Maybe developing a tiny bit of shame at the bilge they're now pumping out on a daily basis”. If only. Like so much of our free and fearless press, dog-whistling and lying for clicks is de rigueur. If they can get away with it.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/zelostreet9