Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
This is an extremely dopey narrative that gets repeated constantly on the Internet. The VAST majority of members of the media are NOT opinion writers, and thus should NOT be voicing opinions in their articles.
It's not about me ( obviously ), though I am comfortable in the positions I have taken on these and related issues in the past. However, some rush to judgement, just because maybe it makes you feel better or helps you pander to the masses, isn't going to help in the long run.
Bottom line, blaming others that are completely innocent is nonsensical and only works to obfuscate the real issues.
|
You're correct that I was not directing this comment towards you. If you think Baffert deserves more due process, that's a reasonable position. As far as I am concerned, he's already had plenty of process and, after having numerous horses die in his care back in 2013 (he's lucky it wasn't 2019 when Hollendorfer was given the boot for that reason), and then had repeated and adjudicated medication positives over the past two years, it is long past time to show him the door.
One of the problems that modern journalism has as a whole is that the lines between news and opinion have been completely blurred, with reporters appearing on networks as "contributors" and voicing their opinions on the events of the day. I am not suggesting that writers should be voicing their opinions in their news articles. Matt Hegarty's article in DRF yesterday, for example, was fair news reporting.
That said, other beat writers for that publication are rather generous with their opinions on a whole host of racing-related topics, whether it be on social media or on shows such as "At the Races." When these sort of issues arise, they are far less open about their views.