Yes, the EDS article is appallingly partisan and unbalanced. In small print it acknowledges that "the only conclusion we can confidently draw [from the consultation] is that there is no consensus". It then devotes the rest of the page to entirely favourable comments. Any concerns are simply dismissed, and as Richard says the one unfavourable comment they have chosen to quote is quite extraordinary.

It does nothing to dispel concerns that the consultation is simply an exercise to justify a decision which has already been made. The published statement by the Board only reinforces this.

Despite a statement on its website that "There is incontrovertible evidence that many people feel excluded by the word ‘English'" they have not published anything to show how that influences those people's choice of music, or that substituting 'England' will alter their attitude to what is unavoidably English music, whatever the Society calls itself. Despite also saying "We want to have mature discussions", so far as I can see no one from EFDSS has entered into any debates online.

I strongly suspect that this is driven not by any expectation that it will widen involvement in folk music but in response to pressure from other arts organisations and perhaps government to appear more inclusive. I think that is the coded message in their statement that "We must now consider a change of name if we are to fulfil our essential ambitions of widening the appeal of the folk music, dance, customs and traditions of England." That is the world we now live in, but I'd be more supportive of a change if they were more honest about it.

"Folk Arts England" is a rubbish name though. It makes no mention of music, dance and song and so will require just as much explanation as EFDSS does. At least the full name, however cumbersome, is pretty clear what it does.