[title]
Everyone loves a conspiracy theory, right? As people around the world followed the tweets emerging from the Fabric licence hearing inside Islington Town Hall yesterday, theories that property developers had somehow brought about the club’s closure started spreading.
And they didn't really stop all day:
This fabric thing seems a bit shady. Can't see any property developers putting any backhanders in 👀
— Foz (@FozGshore) September 7, 2016
On the plus side, I can't wait to not be able to afford one of the inevitable Fabric Apartments... #FabricReview #fabriclondon
— Broker (man) (@TheRealDeaders) 7 September 2016
Shutting down #Fabric isn't about preventing drug deaths though, it's an ageist assault on youth culture by property developers ✌️️
— @jongold 👽 (@jongold) September 7, 2016
@MayorofLondon Not about public safety: #Fabric closed to steal space for developers to build expensive flats for rich absent foreigners
— Matthew L Bishop (@MatthewLBishop) September 7, 2016
So much wrong with Fabric closing but never forget developers used the deaths of two teenagers to line their pockets and destroy 250 jobs
— James Keith (@JamesMBKeith) September 7, 2016
Many focused on the Museum of London’s relocation to Farringdon, close to the club:
Real reason why fabric shut is due to a £200m regeneration project by the museum of London at Smithfield Market to gentrify the area.
— Etienne K (@EtiennePerkins) September 7, 2016
#Fabric closing and Museum of London already announces move. Coincidence much???
— Hayley Harkins (@Hayley_DM) September 7, 2016
Yeah London's heart just skipped a beat. If Fabric becomes Museum of London, there best be a room dedicated to it.This is the history of LDN
— Monique (@MoniqueLouiseR) September 7, 2016
The Museum of London contacted us to explain that:
'Like many Londoners we were sad to learn that Fabric may not reopen following the ruling. In thinking about a future for the Museum of London in Smithfield, our aspiration has always been to talk to work hand in hand with Fabric and the other local businesses so that the area can continue to thrive.'
A number of articles have jumped on The Independent’s claim that the decision to revoke Fabric’s licence was an attempt by Islington Council to make money from the sale of the building.
If #operationlenor wasn't lobbied by developers, I'll eat my Fabric cd collection. #RIPFabric pic.twitter.com/QLjDpyYtWt
— Arthur Chance (@Arthur_Chance) September 7, 2016
Again, the council got in touch to explain that they don’t own the building and wouldn’t benefit from any sale. An Islington Council spokesman said:
‘The decision of Islington Council’s licensing committee on Fabric’s licence was based solely on the evidence, submissions, and representations put before the committee. To suggest anything else is simply wrong. For the avoidance of doubt, Islington Council is not the owner of the building and has no financial interest in the site.’
Or as @danhancox pointed out:
@rakanx @katherinehudson for now at least, fabric own the site. So its not the council's or tfl's to sell to developers anyway
— dan hancox (@danhancox) September 7, 2016