Censorship on Bloodhorse

Trust me when I tell you the Blood-Horse doesn't censor. I know that first-hand.

However, several different people are responsible for posting stories to the website and sometimes things get moved around and links are dropped by mistake. The "time sensitive" thing is an auto response.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by redransom

Trust me when I tell you the Blood-Horse doesn't censor. I know that first-hand.

What does that mean?

They are certainly sensitive of many issues. Are you honestly suggesting they will print pretty much anything?

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

What does that mean?

They are certainly sensitive of many issues. Are you honestly suggesting they will print pretty much anything?

She's suggesting that she writes articles for the Blood-Horse (which she does.)

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

She's suggesting that she writes articles for the Blood-Horse (which she does.)

Are there any other questions you answer for her?

I don't particularly agree with her post whether she writes for them or not.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Are there any other questions you answer for her?

I don't particularly agree with her post whether she writes for them or not.

Nah... I've just read a few of her articles and figured that was what she was talking about.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

What does that mean?

They are certainly sensitive of many issues. Are you honestly suggesting they will print pretty much anything?

Um, what? I didn't think my comment needed to be clarified. But I will regardless....

If it's newsworthy and it steps on toes, even the biggest toes in the game, the BH will still print/publish it. As far as I'm concerned there's really no hard-nosed journalism in horseracing, but the BH isn't afraid to print anything and, so far in six years of working for them, they have. Whether it be editorials or whatever...

Now that's not to say some people's jobs aren't geared toward the less controversial. Haskin, for example, isn't a newswriter. He's a features writer and there's a different direction than someone who does mostly news.

But the BH is a publication owned by the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders' Association and, therefore, designed to promote the industry.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by redransom

Um, what? I didn't think my comment needed to be clarified. But I will regardless....

If it's newsworthy and it steps on toes, even the biggest toes in the game, the BH will still print/publish it. As far as I'm concerned there's really no hard-nosed journalism in horseracing, but the BH isn't afraid to print anything and, so far in six years of working for them, they have. Whether it be editorials or whatever...

Now that's not to say some people's jobs aren't geared toward the less controversial. Haskin, for example, isn't a newswriter. He's a features writer and there's a different direction than someone who does mostly news.

But the BH is a publication owned by the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders' Association and, therefore, designed to promote the industry.

I don't agree with the second paragraph....though I do agree about the lack of hard-nosed journalism in Racing ( over all ) and surely Ray has done a great job with the Jess Jackson story.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I don't agree with the second paragraph....though I do agree about the lack of hard-nosed journalism in Racing ( over all ) and surely Ray has done a great job with the Jess Jackson story.

Okay, that's the beauty of it all... not agreeing. And Ray has stepped on a lot of toes (as have several of his cohorts) in the name of doing the right thing and reporting as is. Think, for example, of the ethics in sales stuff and double commissions, Jockeys' Guild, California racing, NYRA, bogus horse ownership lawsuits, drug testing, etc. The BH has covered it all, objectively I believe. And many, many people came away angry. Mission accomplished? I dunno, but I think so...

I, unfortunately, have first hand experience with the BH stepping firmly on very large toes and me having to go back for more info. Not a terribly friendly situation often times.

[blackthroatedwind]

I wouldn't say the reprinting of Empire's press releases has been hard hitting journalism in the case of NYRA.

[Danzig]

i know back when the jocks were negotiating with manley bloodhorse had no problem in questioning his credentials, and suggesting he was a bad choice and that the guild could do better...matter of fact, i was kind of surprised that they went as far as they did.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I wouldn't say the reprinting of Empire's press releases has been hard hitting journalism in the case of NYRA.

Jesus you're tough. OK, so maybe the NYRA thing wasn't up to your snuff (and I don't know because, well, it's allgreektome) but you simply cannot fault the rest of the things I listed. And, of course, there's more. But I think I made my point.

[Honu]

With all the stuff that is being written about the Sheiks and their "buying up the game" and retiring horses along with a numbers guy basically bashing them and their operation , I think it would totally be funny if they just took their ball and went home.
Pull all their stock and take them to Europe , South America and everywhere else and with that take all their money that they pump into this sport in the USA , dont invite any Americans to come and compete in Dubai ( they are most likely tired of us taking their money anyway) just forget they ever heard of horse racing in the USA.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by redransom

Trust me when I tell you the Blood-Horse doesn't censor. I know that first-hand.

However, several different people are responsible for posting stories to the website and sometimes things get moved around and links are dropped by mistake. The "time sensitive" thing is an auto response.

You better speak with Ray Paulick about that. He's the one that had the article pulled. Of course he's conveniently out of town for a convention.

[Revolution]

They have ever right to pull the article. They are not censoring his opinion, they are taking the article down because some of what he wrote is just not based on anything. In fact some of his statements were bizarre. Is this guy on the Coolmore payroll or something.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Revolution

They have ever right to pull the article. They are not censoring his opinion, they are taking the article down because some of what he wrote is just not based on anything. In fact some of his statements were bizarre. Is this guy on the Coolmore payroll or something.

If he's writing his own opinion, isn't he allowed to gather his opinion from wherever he wants? I read the article and I thought he had some good points. The chances of Bernardini reproducing himself are slim to none... I think that's pretty accurate, don't you?

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

If he's writing his own opinion, isn't he allowed to gather his opinion from wherever he wants? I read the article and I thought he had some good points. The chances of Bernardini reproducing himself are slim to none... I think that's pretty accurate, don't you?

You can have any opinion you want, but you can't just go saying things like the stallion is not likely to produce a great horse. He has no way of knowing that.

He could have said it is "unlikely" he would produce a great horse, but instead he said his chances were "slim to none" language that is not exactly professional.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Revolution

You can have any opinion you want, but you can't just go saying things like the stallion is not likely to produce a great horse. He has no way of knowing that.

He could have said it is "unlikely" he would produce a great horse, but instead he said his chances were "slim to none" language that is not exactly professional.

Rev,

That was his OPINION, though... he never stated it as fact. I just think he's entitled to his opinion and in all honesty, if Bernie DOES reproduce a horse like himself, than Haskin is the only one that looks dumb, so he's the one taking the bigger risk! Why should the Sheiks care who says what about their business practices and what they do with their horses? The fact that they didn't like what he said just proves to me that there is some merit in what Haskin thinks.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Rev,

That was his OPINION, though... he never stated it as fact. I just think he's entitled to his opinion and in all honesty, if Bernie DOES reproduce a horse like himself, than Haskin is the only one that looks dumb, so he's the one taking the bigger risk! Why should the Sheiks care who says what about their business practices and what they do with their horses? The fact that they didn't like what he said just proves to me that there is some merit in what Haskin thinks.

I don't know. People complain about these Sheikhs but the writers are the ones always focusing on the negative. Maybe the editor doesn't like negative stuff written about people that aren't being given a fair deal by the writer. They are bringing back their top 2 horses. Are they just supposed to never retire their horses?

These writers have clearly banded together against Godolphin and the editor of the magazine isn't stupid enough not to see that. These writers have some agenda and it isn't for the good of the sport.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Revolution

They have ever right to pull the article. They are not censoring his opinion, they are taking the article down because some of what he wrote is just not based on anything. In fact some of his statements were bizarre. Is this guy on the Coolmore payroll or something.

He said exactly what the majority of the people on here are thinking. There was nothing bizarre about anything written in the article. I'm sure if Coolmore had just retired Bernardini and Henny Hughes the same sentiments would have been directed towards them. This issue is way more racing fans vs Godolphin and Coolmore than it is Godolphin vs Coolmore.

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

He said exactly what the majority of the people on here are thinking. There was nothing bizarre about anything written in the article. I'm sure if Coolmore had just retired Bernardini and Henny Hughes the same sentiments would have been directed towards them. This issue is way more racing fans vs Godolphin and Coolmore than it is Godolphin vs Coolmore.

i didn't get to read the article but IMO Coolmore doesn't seem to care much if they get bad press...they either ignore it or rebuke it, and then it goes away...the Maktoum's on the other hand get furious and threaten people the best way they know how--with money (or more accurately the loss of it)...thereby ensuring that no other negative items will be printed. They are so bent on appearing benevolent and sporting---while seeming to have no concept that their actions prove just the opposite.