Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You're responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it--details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums' policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it's understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users' profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses -- Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it's related to a horse for sale, regardless of who's selling it, it doesn't belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions -- Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services -- Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products -- While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements -- Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be "bumped" excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues -- Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators' discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you'd rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user's membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

Eventing Nation booted from covering Event in Unionville, PA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

    Wingstem for President!

    May I suggest you choose Bug as your running mate? Such a neat horse. If he’s unavailable given his competition obligations, my dog says she will happily step in. She’s a sweetheart, and as kind and loyal as they come. But does have a troubling tendency to shove her nose in people’s private personal space, uninvited, and then take a long deep sniff... and that probably COULD be a liability on the campaign trail.


    I am voting for SMOD.

    (Sweet Meteor of Death)

    Just end it already.


    Seriously though - I'm not picking on an individual poster or honestly held opinions written by them. I am merely drilling down to the very core issue. The core issue isn't actually diversity and inclusion. The core issue that that this publication screwed the pooch.

    And for the recent poster who noticed that EN is promoting Morven Park - yes it is ironic isn't it.

    Had EN and its journalist simply owned up and accepted responsibility for causing a furor, regrouped, and approached the subject differently, perhaps people wouldn't have been so angry. But it's interesting to see that they don't accept any responsibility for the incident, even though they are in fact responsible for the entire mess. That's very telling to me.

    I work with and evaluate a number of people who, because they are new, are going to make mistakes. Bad ones. Potentially dangerous ones. It's ok to make mistakes. What I tell these people is that yes, you are going to make mistakes. How you DEAL with those mistakes, and how you DEAL with failure and constructive criticism is what matters. For the people who make mistakes, accept feedback, work to improve - those people will be successful. For the ones who are petulant, insist it's someone else's fault, refuse to accept responsibility...... they don't last long. It's all about attitude.


    Comment

      Original Poster

      Originally posted by Wingstem View Post

      That's different than a "journalist" deciding to go on a personal vendetta and rampage. Unfortunately, Boards are bound by certain rules - and board communications are private. But what we do know is that this "journalist" (and yes I'm putting quotes around the word for a reason), attempted to coerce, threaten, and intimidate.

      That's not journalism. That's extortion.
      EN went on a rampage? Because they tried to foster discussion for several months? They may not have gone about it the best way (I have no idea if they did because I still don't think we have enough info to judge) but this seems like an extreme take on what happened.

      Do you really feel Boyds reaction is helping the cause? Can posters here really support that type of petty back and forth between both parties?

      So the best method to fix this, for all the UL riders who don't support EN now is for them to demand they not be covered? How does that help eventing, the community, or anyone at this point?

      Riders can keep saying "EN is just a blog" all they want, but in reality they are the biggest news source in NA focused on eventing. They are more than a blog these days. They are trusted news source for us all.

      Those who know me know I have never been a huge supporter of EN, I hate that they ignore the big issues like ML, and horses being bought for riders who repeatedly break them down, or those who are total jerks at events. But I have a hard time wanting to boycott them for them pressing an issue they felt was right.

      It seems from the outside that people who knew the owners knew he would freak out about this, and so they are really mad that they would dare tickle that bear, knowing he might explode.

      Waiting for Boyd to drop those emails he says he has to back up how horrible EN is. Until then I'm stuck on a fence thinking both sides made mistakes in this.

      Comment


        Wingstem for president!

        Comment


          Originally posted by Jealoushe View Post

          EN went on a rampage? Because they tried to foster discussion for several months? They may not have gone about it the best way (I have no idea if they did because I still don't think we have enough info to judge) but this seems like an extreme take on what happened.

          Do you really feel Boyds reaction is helping the cause? Can posters here really support that type of petty back and forth between both parties?

          So the best method to fix this, for all the UL riders who don't support EN now is for them to demand they not be covered? How does that help eventing, the community, or anyone at this point?

          Riders can keep saying "EN is just a blog" all they want, but in reality they are the biggest news source in NA focused on eventing. They are more than a blog these days. They are trusted news source for us all.

          Those who know me know I have never been a huge supporter of EN, I hate that they ignore the big issues like ML, and horses being bought for riders who repeatedly break them down, or those who are total jerks at events. But I have a hard time wanting to boycott them for them pressing an issue they felt was right.

          It seems from the outside that people who knew the owners knew he would freak out about this, and so they are really mad that they would dare tickle that bear, knowing he might explode.

          Waiting for Boyd to drop those emails he says he has to back up how horrible EN is. Until then I'm stuck on a fence thinking both sides made mistakes in this.
          1) There appears to have been no discussion. It was a demand. The board cannot divulge board communications but having served on plenty of boards and knowing what constraints they have to work under - I can read between the lines. Combined with the comments by EN (including the journalists FB posts which if she is smart - will never make similar posts again) indicate that EN was not acting in a journalistic capacity - but furthering a personal agenda and literally picking a fight where no fight needed to happen.

          When I see journalists and their publications acting in this manner - it affects their credibility. In fact - I go back to another piece written by this journalist about her being a victim of sexual abuse, as well as a recorded interview. I just don't find her credible anymore. And once a person has lost their credibility - good luck getting anyone to listen to you. You may feel differently, which is perfectly acceptable.

          I don't know Mr. Martin, and his writings on this subject are colored by a bias - as he sits on the Board. But..... knowing what constraints he must work under.... again I can read between the lines.

          EN did in fact threaten the landowner and the Board. That was a grave error.

          I'm not calling for a boycott - it's immaterial to me what people choose to read. Perhaps EN will recover some of the credibility that it's lost. Or perhaps eventers don't care as long as there's a chance their name and photo will appear in the publication.


          The ones on the sidelines who watched this incident unfold are the ones you need to worry about. Sponsors, advertisers, and landowners. Your sport is nothing without the support of the horse industry as a whole. A publication that feels comfortable targeting a landowner is one that will target a sponsor, advertiser - anyone.

          A prospective venue owner might not want to get involved in a sport where this sort of thing happens to an innocent person. A lot of you googled this landowner, trying to find out more about him. Which is fine. Now.... turn the tables. Someone working in advertising, someone who is approached about opening up their land, googles eventing or some of the key players - to learn about what they're getting into. And what pops up is an article in the NY times, perhaps this thread, and the other articles written about this landowner.

          Now... think about this from the owners perspective. Will they say yes - bring all these people onto my land, build the jumps, I'll make the enormous personal and financial commitment, go through all the headaches with insurance coverage, permits, traffic control, etc, and hopefully I won't get sued or have my family name smeared across the NYT.

          Eventing is like having the crazy hot girlfriend. Yeah, she's hot and all that but is it worth the crazy.

          This sport appears to put some effort into cultivating newcomers, and broadening appeal. And yet - that's not what appears at the top of a google search, unless you google the definition of eventing.

          Comment


            Originally posted by Jealoushe View Post
            Do you really feel Boyds reaction is helping the cause? Can posters here really support that type of petty back and forth between both parties?
            I see Boyd's reaction more along the lines of - You (EN) have shown me recently that I can not trust you to print a fair article about a topic so I am choosing to not be interviewed by you.

            Some people do not feel like you do, that just because EN did good in the past that they have to blindly go along with them now. EN showed a side that makes it fair that some people want to look the other way and not play in their sandbox anymore.

            Originally posted by Jealoushe View Post
            Waiting for Boyd to drop those emails he says he has to back up how horrible EN is. Until then I'm stuck on a fence thinking both sides made mistakes in this.
            A topic I do not know about, but more than one person has stated here that the board can not legally share those communications. I wonder if EN could share them?

            Comment


              Does anyone remember the below editorial Eventing Nation (and all the other Nation Media channels) published in early June? Did you read it? It's..... troubling. A couple word choices struck me as problematic at best and tropes at worst (bolded for easy scanning). I emailed them at the time asking them to consider revising, as did many others presumably. Leslie Wylie replied personally to say she hadn't read the piece carefully enough before giving it the green light. They revised by changing around some words (what you'll see on the website if you look today), but the thrust of the piece remained unchanged.

              Based on timelines I've seen thrown around, it seems that EN began pushing for the Plantation name change just a couple weeks after publishing the below piece. How does a news site go from publishing an apologists' manifesto like the below to leading the charge against an event's incorporated name in just 3 weeks?? Or.... maybe more to the point, how is it that a news site can go through an internal about-face but be seemingly unwilling or unyielding in allowing any other entities the same opportunity to revise or reconsider??

              ----------


              Part of the Greater Community

              June 3, 2020
              2020 has certainly been a year to remember, in more ways than one. Glaciers continue to melt, but new dinosaur species have been discovered. The COVID-19 pandemic struck, and the stock market crashed. Horse shows stopped, but now they’re beginning again. Businesses suffered, and some won’t recover. Some major equestrian events won’t even return. On top of it all, this past weekend, we’ve seen protests, riots, and outrage over police brutality incidents – most recently with the death of George Floyd. On Friday night, May 29, rioters’ actions were so intense that the President and his family were taken to the White House bunker for safety.

              Riots, looting, and further violence are breaking out across the nation — and they’re not just confined to big cities. I live in a suburb that backs up to cornfields in Illinois. Only a few minutes’ drive away is an affluent suburb where further violence took place last night in the cute little downtown area, including explosive devices and trash cans set on fire by looters. Naturally, the poor shop owners who were looking forward to opening again as Illinois enters Phase 3 in the COVID-19 recovery aren’t able to welcome residents looking to enjoy the day.

              It’s time that humans looked beyond the violence. I call these people in the streets “rioters,” not “protesters,” because protests involve perhaps a march, signs, organization. There is a true purpose to whatever the protest is about. A riot is when things go too far. There is a point where the primal side of humans claws through the skin like a parasite emerging. It antagonizes. Fear begets fear.

              Differences are a natural part of merely existing — our planet is enormous, and with that comes people of different races. Institutional racism has long threaded its way through history with its pointed needle and lack of thimble for protection. Across communities, people have been driven to the breaking point with acts of racism and repeated incidents of police brutality. “Enough is enough,” they say.

              Rebellion has been used many a time in the past to defend liberty. Look at the Boston Tea Party. Say good-bye to massive crates of English tea being thrown into the harbor. I wish, though, that there was a way for humans to act like “people,” as we theoretically evolved away from the cavemen versions of ourselves thousands of years ago.
              Why am I writing this on a site that covers hunter/jumper news and the equestrian community? The answer is simple. At times, we do live in an isolated community. We go to the barn, ride our horses, have a San Pellegrino in the lounge with our barn buddies, and go home. However, we make up a part of a wider community — one that’s determined, at least in part, to destroy itself. Freedom of speech, equality, and peace are what this country was founded on. It’s not where we’re heading. I want to get us mulling on how to speak our minds, but without the violence. It’s time to stop the madness.

              Comment


                Originally posted by Sticky Situation View Post
                Boyd Martin has now officially asked not to be featured on EN.
                In my opinion, no one has acted immaculately in this entire situation, but this has to be the most ridiculous response from anyone. Do you think Marilyn Little was having a lovely time when photos of her and her horses’ bleeding mouths were scattered all over internet blogs (including, but not limited to, Eventing Nation)? Of course not. But at least she didn’t post all over her Facebook page about how she revoked her permission for people to publish images of her that they owned. That they took of a public figure at a public event. At least she recognized that such a statement would amount to nothing more than a publicity stunt.

                Boyd doesn’t have a great history of being concerned about the problems of other people. Women in the sport who struggle to get owners, including those at a time they might have family? Not sure what their problem is, it’s not like they have a disadvantage. His teammate who doesn’t feel supported by the federation on questionable judging calls? He sounds like a dick, he’s should stop whining. (I’m not paraphrasing or being crass. He quite literally called his teammate “a dick”).

                And before I’m asked: he said all of this point-blank in just ONE interview with the Major League Eventing podcast. He’s reinforced these views and more elsewhere, but if you need a direct source, I recommend starting there.

                He’s an exceptional rider and a very hard worker, but I wouldn’t consider him overly concerned about barriers faced by others in the sport. To a certain extent, it’s not his fault – to be as successful as he is, you need to believe that you alone can control the outcome. If you recognize that the starting blocks for you are in a different place than they are for some other people, that undermines your mindset. But not everyone is fortunate enough to have what Boyd was born with, and I’m not talking about innate riding ability.

                Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post
                I do understand the concept... it’s just not how I choose to look at the world.
                You are fortunate to have a choice (that is awarded to you by the colour of your skin).

                If you choose not to look at the world through a lens of those who have privilege and those who do not, you might hurt some people’s feelings. If a black man chooses not to look at the world through a lens of those who have privilege and those who do not, he’s likely to be shot the next time he’s pulled over by police (you know, for “being scary” or something).

                That difference in consequence is privilege, whether you choose to see it or not.

                Comment


                  Just a few posts from more recent pages that really hit home for me – thank you for your contributions.

                  Originally posted by tagsalong View Post
                  I am assuming that if he knows why people are offended, and actively shares things on social media that are belittling them (see how his first reaction was to just post the definition of "plantation" while choosing to not include the portion of the definition relating to slaves), then he doesn't actually care about those people and is only concerned about his own feelings of the event being cancelled.
                  Agreed completely on all counts.

                  Originally posted by OverandOnward View Post
                  This conversation should be about inclusion. But it's not. For some strange, twisted, incomprehensible reason, it's about defending some people for not wanting to discuss inclusion, from a force that is no real threat to them. It's about vilifying some well-intentioned, if possibly misguided, people who wanted better for eventing.

                  I have optimistically always tried hard to hang on to the idea that people involved in eventing are welcoming and inclusive. That they are happy to see non-white eventers joining the ranks. That what they are saying here is just about being lost in the moment. Wound up by others in a discussion that seems hot and urgent in the moment. But I'm becoming worried and sad that I might be wrong about that.
                  Your whole post was excellent. But this, in particular, was perfect. In a very troubling sort of way.

                  Originally posted by Gardenhorse View Post
                  I deleted my post, because this thread is upsetting me and I decided I should just stay out of it. But since you replied before I deleted it and because I do appreciate the effort you are putting into the discussion, I will reply to explain my last post, but then I really am going to try to stay away going forward.

                  I read the emails and thought that Leslie stayed polite and professional while the other woman was the one being rude, unreasonable, and ratcheting up the political rhetoric. Yet you and others seemed to see this email exchange as more proof against EN and their evil ways. To me, only one person in this exchange looks like a jerk and it’s not Leslie. So it makes me wonder if this is the way all the email exchanges went - with people being absolutely insulted by the idea that there’s any issue with inclusion in the sport because they knew a successful Black equestrian once, and then ranting against BLM.

                  I have wondered about the inconsistency between Leslie saying she just wanted to start a discussion about diversity and inclusion and John Thier saying he knew ending PF might be an outcome and didn’t care. And it occurred to me that starting a discussion may have been the original goal, but then along the way they got so angry or frustrated about the responses they received that they decided they didn’t care if they burned it down. I’m not saying I agree with that choice, just that I can imagine it.

                  I think it’s tragic that the landowner pulled his support of the event, but I think it’s also sad that so many people are supporting him for doing that and are putting all the blame for PF ending on one side. The landowner had a lot of options - taking his toys and going home wasn’t the only one.

                  I recently read the book White Fragility, which I highly recommend. It is really eye opening.

                  (Edited to add: I didn’t read the email exchange with Jennifer Yoder you mentioned, because I was mostly not reading the thread for a while)
                  This thread has been really difficult for me, too, but I am so glad you have made the contributions you did. Long before I became a user on the forums, I read along and considered them a litmus test of what the community as a whole was thinking. Without posters like you, this thread starts to look very one-sided to the outside observer. Thank you for contributing your thoughts, even when it’s upsetting.

                  Comment


                    It's so weird the things people will conflate.
                    Let me apologize in advance.

                    Comment

                      Original Poster

                      Originally posted by Wingstem View Post

                      Eventing is like having the crazy hot girlfriend. Yeah, she's hot and all that but is it worth the crazy.
                      This, I can agree with.

                      Comment

                        Original Poster

                        Originally posted by trubandloki View Post
                        I see Boyd's reaction more along the lines of - You (EN) have shown me recently that I can not trust you to print a fair article about a topic so I am choosing to not be interviewed by you.

                        Some people do not feel like you do, that just because EN did good in the past that they have to blindly go along with them now. EN showed a side that makes it fair that some people want to look the other way and not play in their sandbox anymore.

                        A topic I do not know about, but more than one person has stated here that the board can not legally share those communications. I wonder if EN could share them?
                        That is NOT how I feel at all. Please don't put words/feelings in my mouth. I was pointing out the entitledness of it all, happy with En for years and years for the good press, tantrum over the bad press. As an elite athlete in the public eye who is a roll model you have to be able to hold yourself together a little better than that.

                        We have no proof EN threatened to go to the big media, do we? Or that they threatened the land owner or extorted them. Or have ya'll seen something I have not?

                        An article in the NYT is not proof of this. Plenty of equestrians who are journalists out there who may have taken an interest. It is very possible they did, but it is also possible they didn't. We don't have the info.

                        We don't know if the board can share emails, that would be in their by laws. Often they can, in the name of clarity if there is a vote in agreement to do so. But, none of us here are privy to their by laws.

                        Comment


                          This entire situation just smacks of adults behaving badly on all sides, and the divisiveness and unwillingness to see viewpoints other than one’s own that are all too common in America these days.

                          If EN did, in fact, threaten to bring negative coverage in the mainstream media if the event name wasn’t changed in the next two months, that’s a totally unreasonable on their part and very much the wrong way to go about addressing a difficult situation. Exactly what EN did or said is not clear, but it’s been stated as fact in many places that they were making threats, so assuming it’s true, they’re certainly in the wrong in how they went about trying to effect change.

                          But while the landowner is well within his rights to do whatever he wants, since it’s his property to do with as he chooses, stomping off in a huff was not the only option. What if he said he’d be open to changing the name IF he could get help covering the cost of the name change and/or do it gradually over the next several years to minimize the cost? What if he made his own public statement about the historical significance of the name, the property’s lack of ties to slavery, and the area’s involvement in the Underground Railroad to get ahead of the curve and “beat EN to the punch” (or authorized the event organizers to do so)? What if he asked black horsemen in the area for their opinion? Unfortunately, all of these options require consideration that there might be some validity to what “the other side” is saying, even if their execution is terrible ... and they’re probably less satisfying in the moment than just reminding everybody that it’s “his barn and his rules” as had been stated so many times here. It’s perhaps unfair that he was put in that position to begin with, but with his handling of it he does come across to me as someone who’s quite satisfied with equestrian sports being the territory of well-off white people.

                          Boyd Martin’s response strikes me as simply “taking sides” since he’s on the board for PFEE and Walker is one of his owners. Declining an interview with EN given recent events I suppose is reasonable enough, but claiming they aren’t allowed to say his name or his horses’ names on the website at all is over-the-top.

                          Apologies if this is a double post. For some reason the first time I tried to post it, it showed up as “unapproved.”

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Jealoushe View Post

                            Riders can keep saying "EN is just a blog" all they want, but in reality they are the biggest news source in NA focused on eventing. They are more than a blog these days. They are trusted news source for us all.
                            Biggest news source, probably. Trusted news source, not ever, for me. I've posted it elsewhere on this thread, but my first encounters with EN as a news source were painful (site slow to load due to ads, hard to navigate, "fan girl" writing style). Over the years I've watched them post just about anything anybody wants to contribute - pieces written by mothers lauding little snowflake's accomplishments, extremely poorly written blog posts that don't really SAY anything. Not to say there is not anything good ever as I have appreciated a lot of Divine Comedy 's analyses and occasionally "live" coverage of some big events that no other outlet was providing.

                            I think the willingness of the general public to trust and go to a site like this as a first source can be tied to a lot of the problems in the US today - problems that have nothing to do with horses and are a far cry from the eventing world.

                            Comment


                              After, reading all this I think everyone should go home and take a deep breath and see what the important issues are. The landowner has the right to call it want ever he wants. If you do not like it do not go. There are other events. If the people that happen to own the property are white that doesn't give anyone the right to make any comment. It is after all their land. If there are no land owners that are POC why not solicit some?
                              It is a shame that so many people are losing out because of this... Should we change the name of George Washington's Plantation or Thomas Jefferson? The land has meaning to the owners; that is why they name them...

                              Mai Tai aka Tyler RIP March 1994-December 2011
                              Grief is the price we pay for love- Gretchen Jackson
                              "And here she comes. Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's ZENYATTA!"

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Wingstem View Post

                                1) There appears to have been no discussion. It was a demand. The board cannot divulge board communications but having served on plenty of boards and knowing what constraints they have to work under - I can read between the lines. Combined with the comments by EN (including the journalists FB posts which if she is smart - will never make similar posts again) indicate that EN was not acting in a journalistic capacity - but furthering a personal agenda and literally picking a fight where no fight needed to happen.

                                When I see journalists and their publications acting in this manner - it affects their credibility. In fact - I go back to another piece written by this journalist about her being a victim of sexual abuse, as well as a recorded interview. I just don't find her credible anymore. And once a person has lost their credibility - good luck getting anyone to listen to you. You may feel differently, which is perfectly acceptable.

                                I don't know Mr. Martin, and his writings on this subject are colored by a bias - as he sits on the Board. But..... knowing what constraints he must work under.... again I can read between the lines.

                                EN did in fact threaten the landowner and the Board. That was a grave error.

                                I'm not calling for a boycott - it's immaterial to me what people choose to read. Perhaps EN will recover some of the credibility that it's lost. Or perhaps eventers don't care as long as there's a chance their name and photo will appear in the publication.


                                The ones on the sidelines who watched this incident unfold are the ones you need to worry about. Sponsors, advertisers, and landowners. Your sport is nothing without the support of the horse industry as a whole. A publication that feels comfortable targeting a landowner is one that will target a sponsor, advertiser - anyone.

                                A prospective venue owner might not want to get involved in a sport where this sort of thing happens to an innocent person. A lot of you googled this landowner, trying to find out more about him. Which is fine. Now.... turn the tables. Someone working in advertising, someone who is approached about opening up their land, googles eventing or some of the key players - to learn about what they're getting into. And what pops up is an article in the NY times, perhaps this thread, and the other articles written about this landowner.

                                Now... think about this from the owners perspective. Will they say yes - bring all these people onto my land, build the jumps, I'll make the enormous personal and financial commitment, go through all the headaches with insurance coverage, permits, traffic control, etc, and hopefully I won't get sued or have my family name smeared across the NYT.

                                Eventing is like having the crazy hot girlfriend. Yeah, she's hot and all that but is it worth the crazy.

                                This sport appears to put some effort into cultivating newcomers, and broadening appeal. And yet - that's not what appears at the top of a google search, unless you google the definition of eventing.
                                Unsurprisingly to most reading the thread, I strongly agree with all of this.

                                Comment



                                  PFEE put out a vague press release today, though it doesn’t answer my question as to why they didn’t have a lease — after investing so much in improving this property, including a massive all-weather arena, water, etc — that would protect them from being kicked off at the drop of a hat. I guess they did have a halfway decent lease after all? It’s unclear how long they will still be running events, but I hope for the sake of their many supporters that this wasn’t all just a PR stunt to swing the tide of public opinion in their direction:

                                  “As announced, PFEE has received notice that the lease is being terminated. For the time being the lease remains in effect under contractual provisions that defer the effective date of termination. PFEE will continue to hold events pending termination.”


                                  Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                                  It's so weird the things people will conflate.
                                  Just to note: You’ve confused the landowner and organizer multiple times through this discussion. Glaccum organizes the event, Walker owns the land.

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by Groom&Taxi View Post

                                    Biggest news source, probably. Trusted news source, not ever, for me. I've posted it elsewhere on this thread, but my first encounters with EN as a news source were painful (site slow to load due to ads, hard to navigate, "fan girl" writing style). Over the years I've watched them post just about anything anybody wants to contribute - pieces written by mothers lauding little snowflake's accomplishments, extremely poorly written blog posts that don't really SAY anything. Not to say there is not anything good ever as I have appreciated a lot of Divine Comedy 's analyses and occasionally "live" coverage of some big events that no other outlet was providing.

                                    I think the willingness of the general public to trust and go to a site like this as a first source can be tied to a lot of the problems in the US today - problems that have nothing to do with horses and are a far cry from the eventing world.
                                    And... I 100% agree with this.

                                    A while ago someone questioned my comment about the Horse of Delaware Valley and COTH, and how I thought we should cherish the older publications etc. And they rightfully pointed out that HoDV is not what it used to be, and has gone 100% digital and made some SERIOUSLY questionable editorial decisions themselves. And I agree with that... I really do. The George Morris editorial was AWFUL.

                                    So I want to backtrack and be clear that I didn’t mean to put the HoDV on par with COTH.

                                    But I mentioned both on my post about older publications, in the same breath, because what I was thinking of in the back of my mind, is that what they do have in common is that they cover news pertaining to fox hunting and steeplechasing and timber racing... and both publications are deeply tied to the eventing community in area II in particular. I know that many folks quite possibly feel retro pastimes like fox hunting, and elitist sports like timber racing, are just not relevant to the future of eventing. But I feel they are. It goes back to the key issue of open space, and the traditions of the sport, and the communities and people that offer up land for the purpose of sport, even when it involves negative ROI and significant opportunity cost.

                                    I understand Eventing Nation is a media platform that reaches a wider younger audience, when it comes to the eventing community, and is more “hip“ in many respects than the other two outlets. But I feel if they become the “voice” of the sport, and a decision by those in leadership within the governing bodies is made to prioritize “hip” “marketable” and “accessible” over other more traditional considerations...

                                    You will see the loss of more and more venues. And the rise of more arena eventing.

                                    And that’s not something that I personally think is a great thing. Perhaps it’s inevitable though.

                                    I hope that makes sense to others.

                                    Comment


                                      Originally posted by Sandman View Post
                                      PFEE put out a vague press release today, though it doesn’t answer my question as to why they didn’t have a lease — after investing so much in improving this property, including a massive all-weather arena, water, etc — that would protect them from being kicked off at the drop of a hat. I guess they did have a halfway decent lease after all? It’s unclear how long they will still be running events, but I hope for the sake of their many supporters that this wasn’t all just a PR stunt to swing the tide of public opinion in their direction:

                                      “As announced, PFEE has received notice that the lease is being terminated. For the time being the lease remains in effect under contractual provisions that defer the effective date of termination. PFEE will continue to hold events pending termination.”



                                      Just to note: You’ve confused the landowner and organizer multiple times through this discussion. Glaccum organizes the event, Walker owns the land.
                                      I think someone here said they have the lease through the end of this year.
                                      Talking to some people is like folding a fitted sheet.

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

                                        And... I 100% agree with this.

                                        A while ago someone questioned my comment about the Horse of Delaware Valley and COTH, and how I thought we should cherish the older publications etc. And they rightfully pointed out that HoDV is not what it used to be, and has gone 100% digital and made some SERIOUSLY questionable editorial decisions themselves. And I agree with that... I really do. The George Morris editorial was AWFUL.

                                        So I want to backtrack and be clear that I didn’t mean to put the HoDV on par with COTH.

                                        But I mentioned both on my post about older publications, in the same breath, because what I was thinking of in the back of my mind, is that what they do have in common is that they cover news pertaining to fox hunting and steeplechasing and timber racing... and both publications are deeply tied to the eventing community in area II in particular. I know that many folks quite possibly feel retro pastimes like fox hunting, and elitist sports like timber racing, are just not relevant to the future of eventing. But I feel they are. It goes back to the key issue of open space, and the traditions of the sport, and the communities and people that offer up land for the purpose of sport, even when it involves negative ROI and significant opportunity cost.

                                        I understand Eventing Nation is a media platform that reaches a wider younger audience, when it comes to the eventing community, and is more “hip“ in many respects than the other two outlets. But I feel if they become the “voice” of the sport, and a decision by those in leadership within the governing bodies is made to prioritize “hip” “marketable” and “accessible” over other more traditional considerations...

                                        You will see the loss of more and more venues. And the rise of more arena eventing.

                                        And that’s not something that I personally think is a great thing. Perhaps it’s inevitable though.

                                        I hope that makes sense to others.
                                        I'm not sure if you're responding directly to my post from yesterday or someone else's, but I asked the question about journalistic credibility because you were pointing to HoDV as one of the news sources you used to come to your conclusions about the details of this issue. You also suggested that others use HoDV as a source of information on this topic.

                                        Given my own perspective that HoDV seems to have provided questionable or poorly researched information on multiple occasions, I tend to take their reporting with a grain of salt and assume there may be an underlying agenda. I prefer not to base my opinions on such reporting without taking into account how underlying biases may play into the spin of the reporting.

                                        I was trying to understand if you had some other insight into HoDV that allows you to trust their reporting more fully than I do. Almost every HoDV article is written by one person, except for an occasional article by uncredited "Staff Writers" which would seem to limit its viewpoints and often makes the articles appear as if they are opinion pieces of the primary reporter. I'll admit that the fact that HoDV is an on-going vocal GM and AfE supporter also colors by opinion of the publication.

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by Sandman View Post

                                          Just to note: You’ve confused the landowner and organizer multiple times through this discussion. Glaccum organizes the event, Walker owns the land.
                                          Have I? I don't recall using either of those names.
                                          Let me apologize in advance.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X