This New York Times editor was sniffy about pantos and the takedowns came thick and fast (oh yes they did)

John Plunkett. Updated July 6th, 2020

You’ll probably have seen the news that the government has pledged a £1.5bn lifeline to help keep the arts afloat during the pandemic.

Everyone welcomed the move, although Matthew Anderson, the European culture editor of the New York Times, wasn’t sure about one particular detail highlighted by culture secretary – Google, Google – Oliver Dowden today.

UK culture secretary doing the rounds this morning to talk up the arts rescue package. Talked about pantomimes on BBC Breakfast, Today and Sky News. PANTOMIMES.

— Matthew Anderson (@MattAndersonNYT) July 6, 2020

And if he wasn’t totally across the importance of pantos to UK theatres (and the love people have for them) then he is now. Because this happened.

Matthew, I fear your snobbery is showing. Pantomime is one of the richest theatrical forms we have. It connects us with the deep history of our culture. It's also the key to the profitability of many theatres. December seems like our soonest chance of getting back to normal.

— Matthew Sweet (@DrMatthewSweet) July 6, 2020

Hi. CEO of what you'd probably call a "highbrow" arts org here. I don't think I'd have known theatres existed as a kid without group outings to panto. Stop knocking things that aren't to your taste: they still take talent and skill to produce, and the arts should be for EVERYONE.

— Alexis Paterson (@leksi_p) July 6, 2020

Heaven forbid that children and families should enjoy some live entertainment 🙄

— Samara Ginsberg (@samaracello) July 6, 2020

Pantomimes make the money that can subsidise the rest of the year’s productions. And for many children in the UK it’s their first introduction to theatre. Certainly was for me

— Anita Singh (@anitathetweeter) July 6, 2020

And your point is??? Pantomimes are vital! They bring massive audiences to theatres and families to live arts. They introduce kids to theatre, employ many people and bring in enough revenue to help theatres put on a board range of events. Don't be such a snob!

— Sarah Watts (@sarahkwatts) July 6, 2020

Pantomime is often a family’s only affordable chance to get to the theatre. It is often a child’s first introduction to the wonder of theatre. It is because of Pantomime that i work in the arts. Panto’s fund regional theatre. Do NOT discredit pantomime.

— Chris Rankin (@chrisrankin) July 6, 2020

Panto was the first form of live theatre I saw aged 3. I loved it. I've gone on to be part of many incredible works but I still respect panto (& love performing in it). It is the first experience of theatre for so many & brings them back for more. Don't underestimate its value.

— Nicola Foxfield (@NicolaFoxfield) July 6, 2020

The European Culture Editor who doesn’t understand the value, meaning or worth of a pantomime?
Revenue
Audiences of the future
Employment
Enjoyment
Sustainability of regional venues
The genre is worth millions

— Ben Manning 🎖🎖🎖🎖🎖 (@BENJIm83) July 6, 2020

To conclude, back to Matthew Anderson himself.

https://twitter.com/MattAndersonNYT/status/1280083661677830147?s=20

Oh no he hasn’t. And so on.

Source @MattAndersonNYT Image BBC