Eventing Nation booted from covering Event in Unionville, PA

[Sticky_Situation]

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.

[Sticky_Situation]

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.”

[Groom_amp_Taxi]

@Jealoushe

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.

[ivy62]

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…

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@Wingstem

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.

[Sandman]

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.”

@ladyj79

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.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@Groom&Taxi

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.

[AffirmedHope]

@Sandman

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.

[ghst13]

@Virginia Horse Mom

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.

[ladyj79]

@Sandman

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.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@ghst13

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.

I better understand what you are saying, and why you are saying it now. And can appreciate the point you are making. I’ve also read the September 17 article the Chronicle did with respect to Plantation Field, what Nancy Jaffer wrote for Horse Sport on September 21, the article that the Philadelphia Inquirer published on the topic, and the article the NYT published. All of the information each of these sources put out with respect to the underlying facts of this situation, was consistent. The slant of the coverage in the HoDV is very sympathetic to the land owner and event organizers for sure though. And the slant of the coverage in the NYT was very unsympathetic, and much more focused on the lack of diversity in the sport. I felt that the COTH article and the report in the Philadelphia Inquirer were more straight down the middle “newsy” in focus. But the underlying facts each has reported are very consistent. A number of upper level riders and people directly involved in the situation, as well as people who were actually on the ground at Plantation Field International gave quotes to both COTH and Nancy Jaffer, and I thought that was informative and contributed quite a bit to better understanding the situation and the perspective and opinions of those closest to it. The HoDV has now received multiple “letters to the editor” from local folks close to this venue, as they are a long-standing local horse related outlet that man folks in that area still read (right or wrong), and they have published them as well. I do think reading those ALSO contributes to a better understanding of this situation from the outside looking in.

I hope that further clarifies me mentioning them in an earlier comment, and my suggestion that others follow the reporting of the HoDV on this situation. They are the local “horsey” media outlet most closely connected to it.

But I understand your points, and they are fair, so taking the coverage published by the HoDV with a grain of salt does seem wise. I can acknowledge that.

[Simba27]

If any non white person ever reads this thread, I think it’s safe to say they won’t be itching to join the eventing community. And that goes for both “sides” of this argument. A bunch of white women bickering at each other over race issues basically ignoring what non whites have to say about it. If that isn’t racist in and of itself I don’t know what is. This entire debacle has done the opposite of what anyone intended

[ladyj79]

@Simba27

If any non white person ever reads this thread, I think it’s safe to say they won’t be itching to join the eventing community. And that goes for both “sides” of this argument. A bunch of white women bickering at each other over race issues basically ignoring what non whites have to say about it. If that isn’t racist in and of itself I don’t know what is. This entire debacle has done the opposite of what anyone intended

(If you read the whole thread, you’ll find the non-white person contradicting you. But fwiw, non-whites are no more a monolith than whites)

[TheMoo]

After 54 pages it seems to me no one here has any attachment to the name. It seems to me the disagreement is EN not caring if the event got cancelled to prove a point. Dialogue is good. It’s unfortunate EN was so impatient.

[ghst13]

@Virginia Horse Mom

I better understand what you are saying, and why you are saying it now. And can appreciate the point you are making. I’ve also read the September 17 article the Chronicle did with respect to Plantation Field, what Nancy Jaffer wrote for Horse Sport on September 21, the article that the Philadelphia Inquirer published on the topic, and the article the NYT published. All of the information each of these sources put out with respect to the underlying facts of this situation, was consistent. The slant of the coverage in the HoDV is very sympathetic to the land owner and event organizers for sure though. And the slant of the coverage in the NYT was very unsympathetic, and much more focused on the lack of diversity in the sport. I felt that the COTH article and the report in the Philadelphia Inquirer were more straight down the middle “newsy” in focus. But the underlying facts each has reported are very consistent. A number of upper level riders and people directly involved in the situation, as well as people who were actually on the ground at Plantation Field International gave quotes to both COTH and Nancy Jaffer, and I thought that was informative and contributed quite a bit to better understanding the situation and the perspective and opinions of those closest to it. The HoDV has now received multiple “letters to the editor” from local folks close to this venue, as they are a long-standing local horse related outlet that man folks in that area still read (right or wrong), and they have published them as well. I do think reading those ALSO contributes to a better understanding of this situation from the outside looking in.

I hope that further clarifies me mentioning them in an earlier comment, and my suggestion that others follow the reporting of the HoDV on this situation. They are the local “horsey” media outlet most closely connected to it.

But I understand your points, and they are fair, so taking the coverage published by the HoDV with a grain of salt does seem wise. I can acknowledge that.

Thank you for clarifying. As with all media there are certainly sources biased in different directions and we all have to find our way through to make our own judgements based on the various pieces of data that we can find knowing that our own perspectives and experience influence our view of the situation.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@ghst13

Thank you for clarifying. As with all media there are certainly sources biased in different directions and we all have to find our way through to make our own judgements based on the various pieces of data that we can find knowing that our own perspectives and experience influence our view of the situation.

Thanks for this response. I 100% agree with you.

Media is a tricky, tricky thing these days. And a frustrating thing. If you read enough, and wait long enough, one of your favored “trusted sources” will inevitably DEEPLY disappoint you sooner or later, with respect to coverage of an issue you really care about.

In my regular life, I try and make a habit of consuming “news” from a variety of sources. I read both the Atlantic, and the Federalist. Both have bias. I read a lot of other stuff as well, on all sides, in bits and spurts. No matter what my personal opinions and biases are. If I take a deep interest in a particular topic, I try and consume as much information as possible about it, from a WIDE variety of sources, which approach the issue or topic from different perspectives. I feel like this has kept me a little more honest, and better informed, over the course of the last several years.

I will fess up though, I’m a stay at home mom right now, and have always been a “compulsive reader.” I enjoy reading articles and other stuff (novels, fiction, history, etc) all day long, in my bits of free time during the day, in between chores and appointments, riding, and schlepping my kiddos around, etc. It’s my hobby of choice, other than horses. So this broad information consumption and analysis strategy works fine for me But I can understand if it isn’t practical for others.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Two PFEE Board members have now reacted to Boyd’s latest Facebook statement with the following comments:

”Absolutely correct, Boyd. Thanks for taking a stand on the ‘how it was handled’ I think all of us want diversity in sport. EN just handled it incorrectly. PS that’s plantation’s picture on EN’s website. ” - Anne Ogletree

” Very well said Boyd Martin I really appreciate it after working so hard with you and everyone involved on this event to have it closed because of such bad professionalism and dishonesty on the part of EN staff. They still haven’t come clean on what really transpired.” - Amy Ruth Borun

So I think we are now at 5 PFEE board members having spoken up and said that this was handled poorly by EN, etc. Phillip Dutton and Denis Glaccum as well. And of course, Cuyler Walker himself was a PFEE board member. I will leave Evie Dutton and Bambi Glaccum out of it, as they haven’t made public comments I have seen, and it’s not right to assume Phillip and Denis speak for them, IMO.

Mary Coldren is not only on the PFEE Board of Directors, she’s also actually on the USEA Board of Governors. I can understand d her making NO public comments about this situation, given that.

[Jealoushe]

#releasetheemails

[trubandloki]

@Jealoushe

#releasetheemails

Are you intentionally ignoring the fact that it has been said that the board can not legally do this?

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@Jealoushe

#releasetheemails

I’m curious :lol: Amy Ruth Borun has suggested in other public comments that Leslie Wiley release them. Legally, that’s apparently straightforward. But for any PFEE board member to release them? Apparently not straightforward.

Leslie actually publicly commented on Boyd’s post… then deleted it. So I’m not sharing that. But she’s still defending that they (EN) didn’t handle this poorly… so… the implication is that other folks overreacted, I guess.

Leslie should release the emails at this point if she can. My guess is it will change NOBODY’S mind anyway at this point. Everyone has formed an opinion and picked a side, and are sticking to it at this point. Self included, truth be told.