One thread exposes how a small group raised a transphobic Twitter mob against the NSPCC

Munroe Bergdorf
Support us and go ad-free

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) “cut ties” with trans activist Munroe Bergdorf on 8 June. Three days earlier, Bergdorf announced that the charity’s phone support service Childline had appointed her as its first LGBTQI+ campaigner. But a Twitter campaign led by a Times journalist resulted in Childline dropping Bergdorf. And one person explained exactly why the campaign was so effective.

Twitter mob

Times journalist Janice Turner publicly tweeted the NSPCC on 6 June, asking why Childline had hired a “porn model” as its ambassador. Turner suggested this choice would lead to “cancelled direct debits”. Although it was liked and retweeted only a few hundred times, it appeared to have its desired effect. The charity made its decision just two days after Turner’s tweet.

Bergdorf said she was “unbelievably sad” about the U-turn, and also pointed out that:

I have never shot porn in my life, secondly demonising those who do isn’t okay either.

She also pointed to Turner and transphobia as reasons for the charity’s move.

While the NSPCC hasn’t announced its reasons publicly, another trans activist explained how just a few people can have a big impact via social media.

“Laser focus”

Twitter user Helen explained that Twitter can amplify a message because “all ‘likes’ and ‘retweets’ are created equal”. The effect is to make a single tweet seem like “wave upon wave of negativity”. And when backed up by an apparently reputable source, the tweet may cause someone “like NSPCC CEO Peter Wanless” to “freak-out and scramble”:

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

As a result, it took only a few individuals to have a big impact. Helen pinpointed the source of the claims about Bergdorf to a Twitter account called the Safe Schools Alliance. And its message was repeated by Turner:

The Safe Schools Alliance account was set up in May 2019. At the time of publishing it had just 11 tweets and a few hundred followers. Despite this, Helen explained, the group had a direct line to thousands of people through Turner:

Furthermore, Safe Schools Alliance appeared to have little interest in the NSPCC. In fact, its closest Twitter connections were with anti-trans groups such as Fair Play For Women and Women’s Place UK. In fact, Helen called Safe Schools Alliance a “subset” of the two groups, as well as a third group, Transgender Trend.

Helen estimated the trio brings together a few thousand “hard core” anti-trans activists with a wider circle ready to participate in online attacks:

However, combined with the reach of a high-profile person such as Turner, it created an attack with “laser focus“. And that could have made the target feel as though it was facing a “tsunami”:

And Helen says the result is a small “cabal of bigots” with the potential to make a major charity like the NSPCC drop one of its ambassadors.

Emboldening hate

It’s not the first time the Safe Schools Alliance has made news. In April, the group pressured two councils to withdraw a trans ‘toolkit’ from schools over alleged health concerns. With a second successful campaign again targeting trans issues, the group has a clear agenda. And it’s found an easy way of magnifying that agenda’s impact.

In the end, Bergdorf’s removal is about more than just who represents a charity. As London-based LGBTQI+ magazine QX explained, it emboldens anti-trans attitudes:

Twitter users see people like Turner taking part and assume that, because they’re prominent in media, it’s the correct view to have. They’re directly creating and encouraging hate and as a result of that, are putting people in direct physical harm.

That’s the real concern. Campaigns like the one led by Turner and the Safe Schools Alliance could end in injury or worse for trans people across the country. And knowing how they operate is one step towards making them powerless.

Featured image via YouTube – Channel 4 News

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. So they will lose support. Quite probably. On the other hand, I stopped supporting the NSPCC once I realised how ready they are to support popular bandwagons, and how little imagination they use in discriminating amongst the causes they promote. Nothing about this suprises me.

    2. This “one thread” was virtually illiterate. It took an unsupported supposition (that the NSPCC acted purely because of one letter on social media)

      It then added to that a very basic pseudo – analysis of the followers of three feminist groups. It drew the conclusion that because the members of those groups didn’t follow either Mind or the NSPCC on twitter they didn’t care about children or mental health

      To that it attached another assertion – that there is a worldwide conspiracy of 5 thousand women who hate trans people are who are manufacturing all dissent.

      Now I know the Canary is known neither for its accuracy nor its journalistic ethics, but even given that, this propagandising is a real stretch. Have you actually read the thread you’re acclaiming?

      Your “journalist” Glen Black, failed to identify the writer of the thread (who he referred to as “twitter user Helen”) as an employee of controversial charity Mermaids. He failed to interrogate the methodology or approach. 5

      He failed to explore or even attempt to understand the criticisms of bergdorf – which centred on that individuals publicly available racist, lesbophobic and sexist public statements and their repeated encouragement for children to contact the individual privately.

      He failed to examine what other factors might mean women who disagree with the new trans orthodoxy use social media differently

      He failed to show any understanding of the material class analysis that clearly demonstrates women are oppressed not because of gender, but because of their biological sex. Because of that he clearly failed as a political writer to understand that denying women’s oppression on the basis of their biology (and therefore their right to organise against that oppression) is a neoliberal attack on working class women.

      I have always been struck by the similarity of The Canary to the Daily Express -a rag that well known for its wholesale regurgitation of twitter threads. And so in a way I am sadly unsurprised by this atrocious piece of writing. But really, you should be heartily ashamed.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.