So, this is nice. She doesn’t like offensive language so she uses offensive language. Is this the Public Relations and Marketing Director at EN?
I have been away from COTH forums since early pandemic. This topic of this thread brought me back, and I haven’t read the whole thing yet so forgive me if this has been addressed. My understanding from having looked up results on the FEI web site is that the FEI refers to all events (in all disciplines, I think) by the name of the place where the event is held rather than by any local name.
Wow. EN certainly screwed over more than the eventers if the family now decides not to permit others to use that field for any sort of gathering at all (like 4H, or having field events for dogs, drag scent hunts, etc.). Are the other groups calling them out? Because it sounds as though this could lead to much larger losses.
Is this true?
EN “the loss of the event might be the outcome”
Who authorized them to take that risk?
Does this mean the family will sell the land for houses now?
The land has been in the family for multiple generations. Although it is worth tens of millions, I doubt it will be sold. It will just no longer be available for those who wanted to be outside in a glorious setting. Such a loss and such a shame!
That is a huge loss. Why in the world did EN decide to basically insult the host of the event (landowner)? They say they are journalists - why didn’t they research the history of the name before they took the risk of screwing up something for everyone else in and out of their sport?
I’m so sorry for those who are affected now and will be in the future.
Is there any chance that if EN isn’t permitted on the grounds or to cover the event, they will soften their stance and still permit the 4H groups, etc. to use the land?
if the level of violence at protests being portrayed by the media is at all accurate (I’m Canadian) I would certainly be cutting all ties with anyone remotely involved in this train wreck as fast as possible in hopes of getting my family and property out of the public eye as fast as possible - the social media mob has little care for who’s wrong or right just fans the flames of drama.
I believe EN thought they were being woke and hip, and taking up the politically correct cause. Journalism can exact change when it does its job of reporting things honestly and correctly. It appears EN forgot they were supposed to be journalists and not activists.
So sad. I am going to cross my fingers, toes and seye and hope that the land owners decide to let other groups continue to use it in the future. Even if they decide not to host that particular event.
Another quote for this excellent post.
I remember when I first happened across EN. My impression was that it was a fan site for eventing. It was so ad laden it took forever to load, and the content wasn’t worth waiting for. As it grew and became more comprehensive in its coverage and more significant in the sport, I found myself occasionally going there to find info that I wasn’t finding through other channels. However, it was never my first choice - its quasi-journalistic fan girl approach never set well with me.
If, as a quasi-journalistic entity, EN was uncomfortable with the name of the PF event, they could have decided to call it Unionville and let that be the end of it. Instead, I guess they have made it clear that they see their organization as a platform for change. I hope this is the hill they die on, but I doubt that will happen.
This is correct. For several years that I’m aware of, the FEI names competitions by their location. Rolex (or land rover) is listed as “Lexington,” Chatt Hills is “Fairburn,” etc. The FEI is not trying to be politically correct by calling Plantation Field “Unionville.” It’s their standard naming system used for all events.
My only other comment on this matter is that I am glad I quit writing for EN in 2014. I greatly enjoyed writing and developing the site when it was young, but as the site headed in other directions I was pushed aside and decided to step off.
Ok, from reading both EN’s post and the resulting responses, it seemed as though EN had not reached out first. Thanks for the clarification
So, I was thinking about this a bit more. How many non-White employees does EN employ? If this is their entire staff, the answer appears to be none.
It may be time for them to lead by example rather than pointing the finger at others for their business and personal decisions.
This has been answered a few times in the thread. They stated in the comments they have a few employees that are minorities and are actively trying to add more diversity.
does anyone know if it’s true that EN did threaten go mainstream media if they didn’t change the name? I think that’s an important part of the story if it is true but so far it just seems like a rumour? Any proof?
The article from coth says that PFEE board members told them this. Given the aggressive nature of ENs campaign, first contacting USEF, then going around them when it wasnt moving fast enough for them, I’m inclined to believe the PFEE management. EN acted like a bunch of spoiled, entitled toddlers who increased the intensity of their temper tantrum when the previous tactic did not immediately go their way.
Why aren’t any minorities on the Staff page? That seems weird. In my company, everyone is on the Staff page. You’d think if they had minority employees they would acknowledge them given their recent focus on diversity issues. Forgive me for not trusting everything EN says, but their story changes so often…who are these minorities and what positions do they hold?
I also agree with the immediate poster below me…the EN article today admits he didn’t go to the event first (it says John regrets not doing so) and says that he didn’t “threaten” anyone, but he doesn’t deny EN saying it would go to the mainstream press. Maybe he doesn’t think that is a “threat” but the landowner might well see it as such.
FEI refers to many (most?) of their competitions in all disciplines by location rather than “xyz festival” or the like show producer’s name. https://www.fei.org/events
Does anyone know the terms of the lease that the event organizer has/had with the landowner? Although the landowner’s email said he was terminating the lease, most leases have a period for which the lease is in place and only certain clauses under which it can be terminated early. Obviously the event this weekend is still going on. Given all the improvements the organizer has put into the property for the events, I would have thought that they had a long-term lease on the property.
Most will be renewable annually, and also have cause provisions allowing immediate termination (which IME usually include something about for cause termination including casting a negative light on the owner, certainly they do in my contracts).
I think it was extremely kind of the landowner to not even threaten to shut down the show this weekend. Clearly he knew the organizer and participants already invested a lot in this weekend and he isn’t trying to punish them. He also clearly said he would make himself scarce and not cause any problems. Contrary to those who felt he reacted over the top, that shows a lot of consideration for the people who did NOT cause this problem.
And the other thing that really chaps my ass is how EN immediately dismisses anyone who doesnt 100% agree with their tactics a racist, as shown in the image above.
You don’t have to be a racist to feel that they horribly messed up here.
I’m actively anti racist, I’ll spare you the supporting details, but it is true. And this mess is 100% ENs fault for pushing too hard too fast and just wanting their way no matter what.