Chris Packham talks about impact of internet trolls

Please just watch these two videos.

The first one was published on Chris’s twitter feed on New Year’s Eve, the second one was an interview he did with Channel 5 News on 5th January 2022.

18 thoughts on “Chris Packham talks about impact of internet trolls”

  1. I’ve just had a 10 day pile on which has escalated into real life stalking and intimidation. I have no support.

    1. That’s a bit worrying to hear. Not sure what the issue is or what the circumstances are but I would urge you to seek some support from the authorities. I hope you’re ok.

  2. Stay strong Chris; I know it must be terrible having to face such intimidation, whether words or actions, on a daily basis – it must be terribly wearing at times. I wish you a much happier 2022 for you and all of your family.

    Our government, and these social media companies must do a lot, lot more and to protect individuals from this hate. It is pathetic the excuses they come up with to do absolutely nothing. But it seems that profit is more important to these companies than peoples wellbeing and mental health.

    Its good that the police have been doing all that is in their power. These powers need to be made much stronger and more robust so that they can do something about all those who troll on the internet. Name and shame and stop their hiding. With strong punishments, not the usual slap on the wrist.

  3. Absolutely shocking. I don’t know Chris, I most likely never will but I’m 110% behind him all the way. Please pass on my respectful good wishes if you are able. There is no place in society for fascism.!

  4. Has Chris written down the legal protections he’d like to see brought in so that I and others can be precise in the measures he is proposing and we can write to our MPs about? Thanks.

  5. This trolling would test the most robust of people. Chris is one of the most robust and determined people who won’t be cowed by this disgraceful abuse. However, it is taking its toll and I can see that on his face and hear it in his voice especially on the Twitter video.

    If the police don’t have the powers to investigate those anonymous accounts then it is clear that we must introduce new legislation that enables the police to deal with these crimes.

    It seems to me that generally in our society the criminals are more protected than the victims. In some areas of crime the police actually protect the victims; fox hunting being one example. Until we all stand up against the abusers or/and demand change I suspect this totally unsatisfactory current situation will continue.

    To all those subject to this awful abuse I really feel for you. I don’t like telling people to “be strong” as it seems to disallow totally understandable emotions. What I will say though is that I admire each and everyone of you for having the tenacity to stick to your principles. You do have the moral high ground, don’t ever doubt that.

  6. The other very disturbing angle to this vile behaviour that Chris Packham has suffered, is that if those behind the trolling are capable of engaging in such abusive on line hatred towards Mr Packham, then just what sort of cruel and evil behaviour are they inflicting on the wildlife, that Chris and others like him are trying to protect?

    Internet trolling just allows another avenue for some very horrible people to express their bullying tendencies.
    This online behaviour will just be another manifestation of the vile, hate filled, anti-social and selfish lives these people live.
    I suspect those people causing so much distress to Mr Packham are the same people who get enjoyment from needlessly killing wildlife, watching dogs fight or rip wildlife apart, and quite probably engage in other abusive, violent, anti social and criminal behaviour.
    There is no place in society for such people, and the laws need to be strengthened, and catch up with this new phenomenon, so that those who engage in such behaviour can be properly dealt with and suitably punished for the suffering they are causing others.

  7. There seems to be an organised ‘attack’ on anyone campaigning on hunting/shooting by the shooting Lobby. They have ‘infiltrated’ several wildlife gps on my facebook feed and diss anyone defending people like Chris or attacking hunting . These people have guns and they do intimidate people online. This has all happened suddenly since September 2020 and I believe it has been organised by some organisation .

    1. “They have ‘infiltrated’ several wildlife gps… and diss anyone defending people like Chris or attacking hunting…”

      Too true. The shooting brigade are vociferous on Birdguides, and whereas their regular combination of lies and denigration of Chris Packham, Wild Justice and the RSPB are tolerated by the owners of Birdguides, I have eventually been banned for calling them morons:-)

      1. Agreed, Keith. These people have infested Birdguides, and their lies go unchallenged by so-called moderators. What a shame that Dave Gosney ever sold up.

  8. Whenever I hear a reference to the horrors of the ‘dark web’ I always think bloody hell the ‘normal web’ is rotten enough, never mind anything else! It is barely regulated as it is! I am afraid I cannot see any political will on the horizon to grip it either. Chris Packham and other conservationists in the public eye are sadly the target of both the knuckle dragging thugs and also of people with a lot of power and political influence. I often think about the incredible wealth, power and capacity for ‘black ops’ of the those at the absolute top of the grouse shooting world, and I wonder (slightly fearfully) what they will do in the future as things continue to tighten up on their hobby. I cannot see the issues around the destruction and exploitation of nature and the environment being satisfactorily solved without a lot of progressive political and social change happening at the same time. A hard road still ahead on that one. Additionally, I’ve hung around with enough ‘average shooting folk’ to have heard a fair cross-section of slagging off of ‘antis’ or ‘f—-g birdwatchers’ and ‘nature c–ts off the telly’ down the years. I feel that although most are just blokes who enjoy a grumpy rant among their own small-minded circles in the pub, that there are also genuinely a quite significant minority of deeply troubled and delusional souls (who have perhaps had more success with shooting and hunting than with other things in life), who respect very few boundaries in the face-to-face world, never mind the online one. To me it would be very wise and not be inappropriate (speaking as a donor of a few modest sums to Wild Justice), if the Wild Justice ‘kitty’ paid for the services of some private security consultants to look out for it’s founder members from time to time, at least to give them some sense of reassurance.

  9. My understanding is that all three Directors of Wild Justice (Ruth, Mark and Chris) have experienced attacks of varying severity including trolling. My sympathies go out to you all and especially Chris who has had the arson attack on his property.
    It would be useful to set out what changes are necessary to reduce/eliminate trolling so that changes in the law could be pursued. Could Chris start a petition to change the law? I’m sure it would be supported strongly.

    1. The main reason that Chris (plus Mark and Ruth) are victims of trolling is that some people fear them because they dare to speak the truth, and more importantly they are convincing other people of the truth regarding game shooting/raptor persecution.
      Keep up the good work, you are having an impact. If you weren’t you wouldn’t be subject to such a level of trolling.

  10. When I was in the middle of a long fight against (Network Rail/HS2/Deutsche Bahn) I was once forced to seek the protection of Thames Valley Police from attacks on my property and personal intimidation carried out by contractors. In a way that was relatively easy because the culprits’ employers were obviously identifiable, and (so I was later assured) the perpetrators were sacked.

    However, Downing Street and Google UK swapped executives (as reported in The Guardian) while Google UK executives were holding ‘secret’ meetings with ‘leaders of national industries’ (as reported in The Times). Serious investments are involved with Network Rail and HS2…. I had a local (on-line) campaign and e-petition for Parliament concerning a certain supply route…. which also involved Natural England eventually changing sides and supporting the destruction of a rare colony of Bats…

    Without any warning, and without any explanation (other than a bizarre “we have to keep this junk off the internet”), my access to my Google account was barred (and because it is an IMAP service, all my many technical reports were also impounded).

    Any and every email to my MP, or my (then) MEPS were blocked by Google at its own servers.

    This situation lasted approximately six months while I resorted to postal complaints about it to the Information Commissioner’s Office with copies to Google, my MP and MEPS…

    Then, without any warning or explanation, my access to Google was restored. But by then Parliament had voted through the HS2 Bill…

    Sometimes, internet trolling and similar, serve business (or even bigger) interests… It is war out there…

    1. I agree. My twitter account was locked recently. I posted a fox that had been ripped to pieces by the hunt (this image had been tweeted numerous times by me and others). But when I tweeted the image in conjunction with my questioning of a government minister (which was to say: why say hares are” precious and beautiful” when you do nothing to stop the illegal hunting of foxes) my account was locked. I appealed which predictably was rejected. I have no doubt that someone with power used that power to stop me

      1. This is all very troubling, Sue. In my case the Minister for Rail (at the time) came to see me, and Lord Krebs spoke up for me in the House of Lords (because I had a long and well-publicised local campaign which united people of all persuasions). I still do not know whether it was this political pressure, or the ICO, working ‘behind the scenes’, which eventually got my Google ban lifted.

        But most ‘ordinary’ people are unlikely to receive such support. It is deeply concerning when social platforms exercise such naked political ‘control’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s