Regarding funds donated to charities - I see that the information about which charities are going to receive proceeds from the big event is in the program. In 2019 it was the Chester County Food Bank.
If anyone really wants to ask how much money any program received from PFEE they can contact the recipients.
I looked at the 2016 990 for Work to Ride and they saw an increase in donations of about $98,000 that year. I have NO idea how much was as a result of the event held in September of 2016 at PFEE.
Okay - so it appears that Chester County Food Bank has been a regular beneficiary since 2009, Spring Brook Farm since at least 2015, Retired Racehorse Project in 2017 & 2018, Work to Ride in 2015 & 2016 (in each of those years the money they received increased around $100,000 - but that doesn’t mean it all came from the big PFEE event in September), Cheshire Land Preservation in 2015 & 2018, Cheshire Hunt Conservancy in 2016 & 2017.
I don’t know where to find the programs from 2010 - 2014; 2019 & 2020. If anyone has them and can fill in the blanks, that would be great.
It also bears repeating that there are more events than the big one in September at PFEE. Also, it was used by more groups and they may have their own programs archived somewhere. On more than one occasion a local dog rescue was invited to bring adoptable dogs to be showcased, raise money for the group and possibly have people in the area find a new buddy.
ETA: The Chester County Food Bank was established in 2009.
@MorganSercu - thanks for looking up the non profit causes they’ve donated to in the past, and sharing what you found. A venue like this? It’s certainly a loss on many levels. It obviously has been a place where the eventing community came together for 20 years. And in the process, funds were raised for a NUMBER of good local causes. Work To Ride was one of them - for a few years. Obviously other local non profit causes also benefited from Plantation Field though.
It’s truly sad how divided everyone is. Not just in terms of the eventing community… in society.
When one equates “calling someone out” with having an “important conversation” and any sort of questioning is “toxic”…there’s not much there to work with in the end.
I wouldn’t take anything Candace Owens or the Hodge Twins say as representative of how POC feel. I’ve seen quite a lot of my black friends be really upset about the things they say and disagree absolutely with them. And even more when I look into what people in my community think.
No idea about the rest but if they are similar, probably the same thing. If 2000 people say they feel one way and five people say they feel differently, you don’t get to ignore what the 2000 people say just because you personally like what the 5 say.
Thank you for doing the digging, and sharing what you found.
Either you, or another poster (or both) shared a link about the basics of journalistic ethics earlier in this thread. It was excellent and informative.
I think it’s also relevant to approach this story from the perspective of the classic journalistic questions… I found a good explanation of them on a reference site I like, thoughtfullearning.com, and copied their explanation of journalistic questions and how they should be incorporated into writing…
Asking and Answering the 5 W’s and H Questions
To collect key information about your writing topic, ask and answer the 5 W’s and H questions—Who? What? When? Where? Why? and How? These questions are sometimes called journalistic questions because all news stories should answer them. Gather answers to the 5 W’s and H questions anytime you are writing about an event, an experience, or something that happened. 5 W’s and H Questions
[B]Who[/B] was involved?
[B]What[/B] happened?
[B]When[/B] did it happen?
[B]Where[/B] did it happen?
[B]Why[/B] did it happen?
[B]How[/B] did it happen?
Back to the key topic of Plantation Field, it’s name, the controversy surrounding the suggestion that the venue should change its name, and the eventual decision by the property owner to cancel the lease for his property, cut ties with the eventing community in general, and cease with his longtime support of the sport...
Does anyone think Eventing Nation did a fair, professional and thorough job of looking into the 5W’s and 1H behind the name of this particular competition venue… Plantation Field, before they penned an essay titled “The Problem with Plantation” on September 16th?
Think about it. EN really should have dug into the 5W’s and 1H from multiple angles…
Who was involved in naming Plantation Field?
What were the circumstances involved in the decision to name this venue Plantation Field?
When did they name this venue Plantation Field?
Where is this venue (Plantation Field) located?
Why did they name this venue Plantation Field?
How did they go about naming this venue Plantation Field?
Who finds the name of this venue, Plantation Field, insensitive and objectionable?
What about the name Plantation Field is insensitive and objectionable?
When did the name of this venue become something folks considered insensitive and objectionable?
Where are the people who find the name of this venue offensive and objectionable located?
Why do some people find the name of this venue insensitive and objectionable?
How did they develop an opinion with respect to the name of this venue?
Who is unwilling/unable to change the name of this venue, Plantation Field?
What are some of the circumstances surrounding their unwillingness/inability to change the name?
3 When did they decide and communicate they were unwilling/unable to change the name of this venue?
Where are the people who are unwilling/unable to change the name of this venue located?
Why are people unwilling/unable to change the name of this venue?
How did they go about communicating that they were unwilling/unable to change the name of this venue? And maybe, actually more importantly, how would they have gone about changing the name of the venue, if they actually had been willing to do so… with only weeks left before an FEI competition was scheduled to run at this venue?
Some of us looking from the outside in, at both the September 16th essay EN published, and the responses and reactions and statements and finger pointing from multiple folks involved, are taking in all the available statements on this issue from key folks, various reports written, and background information… and we are concluding that the writer of the September 16 essay “The Problem with Plantation” and the publisher of EN did NOT dig deeply into these questions before writing a very opinionated essay on the name of this venue, and voicing their opinion that the name should be changed.
An alternative thought, is that they did dig deeply into these questions abc gather information, but that the writer and publisher had their minds made up that a name change was necessary, so they disregarded a lot of information they uncovered, and only focused on information which supported their opinion that the name of the venue should be changed when penning and publishing their Sept. 16th essay. That’s allowed… they certainly can editorialize and have an opinion.
HOWEVER…
When Leslie Wylie and John Thier clearly made a decision that they wanted to editorialize and advocate strongly for one particular position with respect to changing the name of this venue… some of us looked at this, and the messy resulting fallout, and began to ask certain questions, such as…
Who wanted to change the name of this venue, Plantation Field? Who did not?
What was involved in their request to change the name of this venue?
When did they begin to suggest the name of this venue should be changed?
Where did various discussions and decisions about the need, as well as the impossibility, of changing the name of Plantation Field actually take place?
Why did some people think the name of the venue needed to be changed, with only weeks to go before the FEI competition?
How did the people who felt the name of the venue should be changed go about discussions this issue, communicating with key stakeholders, and later writing about it?
Yeah… this is a long post by me. And some of these questions are repetitive. Very much so. But anyone with a strong opinion one way or another on this topic, should actually look at these questions and think about them.
Many folks have jumped into this thread, and tried to debate the issue of whether or not the word “Plantation” is, or is not, offensive. Some folks have come to the thread, have discussed at length whether they think many of the folks involved in this situation are behaving and speaking as though they do have some degree of soft bigotry, and a general lack of awareness of their own “white privilege”, etc, etc. And other folks have come to the thread and discussed at length the impracticality of a name change, lack of evidence that anyone was truly offended by the name, and have talked about “cancel culture” and how it can be a divisive and harmful thing.
I think we have beat much of this to death. And many of us have strong opinions on these tangential issues, and are just not persuaded by much of what other folks say.
But if we all go back and look again at this whole situation from the perspective of the 5W and 1H journalistic questions… and then read the September 16 EN essay, and many of the reactions to it (reactions which revealed lots of background information about the origins of the name, abc how communications about this name change issue played out during the late summer and early September)…
Does anybody still think EN did a good job addressing this topic? A fair job? Researched it properly and thoroughly, and shared relevant information with the eventing community and their readers in that essay, and then went on to make a strong argument for why they felt the name of this venue should still be changed?
I personally don’t think they did a good job of addressing it. I think their essay talked a great deal about feelings, and was very one sided in terms of its perspective, and was VERY short on facts about the origin of the name, origin of the push to change the name, and why (from a purely practical point of view), it was almost impossible and would have been challenging and complicated with sponsors, etc, to rename this venue on such a tight timeline with respect to the Sept. 2020 Plantation Field International.
The essay implied that an unwillingness to change the name of this venue on the part of a few was a result of some people being willfully insensitive abc uncaring to the feelings of BIPOC who followed the sport of eventing, or were actually involved in the eventing community.
That’s a really powerful thing to write about, and lead so many people in the eventing community to believe is a possibility… while simultaneously not fully informing readers that changing the name on a tight timeline was no small issue.
I think EN should really reflect on journalistic questions, and journalistic ethics, and do better going forward. They Don still advocate for what they choose, if they choose. The power of the press is real, and important, and freedom of the press is real, and important. And a social media blog with such a substantial following actually IS a pretty important part of “the press” in the year 2020.
But with great power, comes great responsibility.
And I think they fell far short in terms of approaching this responsibly.
Black people aren’t a monolith, so your “black friends” have no more authority to speak for all Black people than any other Black person, regardless of whether you agree with them.
No culture is a monolith. The Black community is not a monolith.
I am not a big fan of Candace Owens, personally, and don’t even know who the Hodge Twins are. But I have read Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and Jason Riley for years. All three are DEEP thinkers, who have been writing on various aspects of societal challenges and the deep wounds and sad legacy African Americans in the US have struggled with.
All three are quite conservative. But are not conservatives who rose to prominence with Donald Trump over the course of the last 4 years. They are deeply serious thinkers, writers, and intellectuals, and well worth reading and listening to when it comes to issues of race in American society. No matter what side of the political divide you fall on.
Just thought I’d mention it for any liberals following this thread who are inclined to actually seek out and read a different perspective on a major societal issue we are struggling with in America. Many of you have recommended others on this thread read “White Fragility.” I’d recommend some of you read anything by these three gentleman to round out your full perspective on other aspects of these issues in our society.
Jason Riley is a longtime Wall Street Journal columnist. He’s also a Race and Welfare Policy Expert for the Manhattan Institute. Here are some more biographical details…
Jason Riley is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, and a commentator for Fox News. He is a recipient of the 2018 Bradley Prize. After joining the Journal in 1994, he was named a senior editorial writer in 2000 and a member of the editorial board in 2005. Riley writes opinion pieces on politics, economics, education, immigration, and race. He also speaks frequently on ABC, NBC, CNN, PBS, and NPR.
Riley is the author of Let Them In: The Case for Open Borders (2008), which argues for a more free-market-oriented U.S. immigration policy; and Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed (2014), which discusses the track record of government efforts to help the black underclass. His most recent book, False BlackPower? (2017), is an assessment of why black political success has not translated into more economic success. He has also worked for USA Today and the Buffalo News. Riley holds a B.A. in English from SUNY-Buffalo.”‹
Thomas Sowell is an intellectual heavyweight, and someone I began reading seriously over 20 years ago, as an undergrad studying Economics. He’s written many many books, articles, and been around for decades. I copied some details of his CV and thought I’d share for anyone not familiar with him or his writing… as mentioning him in the same post as Candace Owens might lead some folks to dismiss his writings out of hand… and that would be a shame… he’s an amazing thinker and writer (but I have a deep love of Economics in general… it was what I studied and loved in school… and others certainly might feel that reading essays by economic intellectuals is about as pleasant as eating Brussels sprouts… :lol:… and that’s OK… I’m a complete geek about all things economics) [TABLE=“border: 0, cellpadding: 0”]
[TR]
[TD]PERSONAL:[/TD]
[TD]U.S. Citizen, born June 30, 1930[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE=“border: 0, cellpadding: 0”]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 795”]EDUCATION: [INDENT]Ph.D. in Economics, University of Chicago, 1968
A.M. in Economics, Columbia University, 1959
A.B. in Economics, magna cum laude, Harvard College, 1958[/INDENT]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]EXPERIENCE: [INDENT]Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, September 1980 – present
Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., September 1974 – June 1980
Visiting Professor of Economics, Amherst College, September 1977 – January 1978
Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, April – August 1977
Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, July 1976 – March 1977
Project Director, The Urban Institute, August 1972 – July 1974
Associate Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., September 1970 – June 1972
Associate Professor of Economics, Brandeis University, September 1969 – June 1970
Assistant Professor of Economics, Cornell University, September 1965 – June 1969
Economic Analyst, American Telephone & TelegraphCo., June 1964 – August 1965
Lecturer in Economics, Howard University, September 1963 – June 1964
Instructor in Economics, Douglass College, Rutgers University, September 1962 – June 1963
Labor Economist, U.S. Department of Labor, June 1961 – August 1962
[/INDENT]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]PRINCIPAL PUBLICATIONS: [INDENT]
Discrimination and Disparities (2018) Wealth, Poverty and Politics, revised and enlarged edition (2016)
[I]Intellectuals and Society /I
[I]On Classical Economics /I
[I]Black Rednecks and White Liberals /I
[I]Affirmative Action Around the World /I The Vision of the Anointed (1995) Race and Culture: A World View (1994 ) A Conflict of Visions (1987) Knowledge and Decisions (1980) Say’s Law: An Historical Analysis (1972)
[/INDENT]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
As for Shelby Steele, he’s another longtime columnist and well regarded conservative academic and writer. He’s also a really interesting person to listen to in terms of interviews he’s done. He’s the opposite of so much of the inflammatory and hyper political type of pundits and commentators that define so much of our National discussion on issues of race in America today. Shelby Steele is a calm, deep thinking, resorted and respectful intellectual. Well worth listening to and reading and thinking about what he has to say on important issues.
Here is some background information about him, and the MANY thought provoking books he’s written on the topic of race in America…
Biography:
Shelby Steele is the Robert J. and Marion E. Oster Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. He specializes in the study of race relations, multiculturalism, and affirmative action. He was appointed a Hoover fellow in 1994.
Steele has written widely on race in American society and the consequences of contemporary social programs on race relations.
In 2006, Steele received the Bradley Prize for his contributions to the study of race in America. In 2004, he was awarded the National Humanities Medal. In 1991, his work on the documentary Seven Days in Bensonhurst was recognized with an Emmy Award and two awards for television documentary writing—the Writer’s Guild Award and the San Francisco Film Festival Award.
Steele received the National Book Critic’s Circle Award in 1990 in the general nonfiction category for his book The Content of Our Character: A New Vision of Race in America (HarperCollins, 1998). Other books by Steele include Shame: How America’s Past Sins Have Polarized Our Country (Basic Books, 2015), A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win (Free Press, 2007), White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era(HarperCollins, 2006) and A Dream Deferred: The Second Betrayal of Black Freedom in America (HarperCollins, 1998).
Steele has written extensively for major publications including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. He is a contributing editor at Harper’smagazine. He has also spoken before hundreds of groups and appeared on national current affairs news programs including Nightline and 60 Minutes.
Steele is a member of the National Association of Scholars, the national board of the American Academy for Liberal Education, the University Accreditation Association, and the national board at the Center for the New American Community at the Manhattan Institute.
Steele holds a PhD in English from the University of Utah, an MA in sociology from Southern Illinois University, and a BA in political science from Coe College, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Originally posted by RainWeasleyView Post
I wouldn’t take anything Candace Owens or the Hodge Twins say as representative of how POC feel. I’ve seen quite a lot of my black friends be really upset about the things they say and disagree absolutely with them. And even more when I look into what people in my community think.
No idea about the rest but if they are similar, probably the same thing. If 2000 people say they feel one way and five people say they feel differently, you don’t get to ignore what the 2000 people say just because you personally like what the 5 say.
I am not a big fan of Candace Owens, personally, and don’t even know who the Hodge Twins are. But I have read Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and Jason Riley for years. All three are DEEP thinkers, who have been writing on various aspects of societal challenges and the deep wounds and sad legacy African Americans in the US have struggled with.
All three are quite conservative. But are not conservatives who rose to prominence with Donald Trump over the course of the last 4 years. They are deeply serious thinkers, writers, and intellectuals, and well worth reading and listening to when it comes to issues of race in American society. No matter what side of the political divide you fall on.
Just thought I’d mention it for any liberals following this thread who are inclined to actually seek out and read a different perspective on a major societal issue we are struggling with in America. Many of you have recommended others on this thread read “White Fragility.” I’d recommend some of you read anything by these three gentleman to round out your full perspective on other aspects of these issues in our society.
Jason Riley is a longtime Wall Street Journal columnist. He’s also a Race and Welfare Policy Expert for the Manhattan Institute. Here are some more biographical details…
Jason Riley is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, and a commentator for Fox News. He is a recipient of the 2018 Bradley Prize. After joining the Journal in 1994, he was named a senior editorial writer in 2000 and a member of the editorial board in 2005. Riley writes opinion pieces on politics, economics, education, immigration, and race. He also speaks frequently on ABC, NBC, CNN, PBS, and NPR.
Riley is the author of Let Them In: The Case for Open Borders (2008), which argues for a more free-market-oriented U.S. immigration policy; and Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed (2014), which discusses the track record of government efforts to help the black underclass. His most recent book, False BlackPower? (2017), is an assessment of why black political success has not translated into more economic success. He has also worked for USA Today and the Buffalo News. Riley holds a B.A. in English from SUNY-Buffalo.”‹
Thomas Sowell is an intellectual heavyweight, and someone I began reading seriously over 20 years ago, as an undergrad studying Economics. He’s written many many books, articles, and been around for decades. I copied some details of his CV and thought I’d share for anyone not familiar with him or his writing… as mentioning him in the same post as Candace Owens might lead some folks to dismiss his writings out of hand… and that would be a shame… he’s an amazing thinker and writer (but I have a deep love of Economics in general… it was what I studied and loved in school… and others certainly might feel that reading essays by economic intellectuals is about as pleasant as eating Brussels sprouts… :lol:… and that’s OK… I’m a complete geek about all things economics)
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]PERSONAL:[/TD]
[TD]U.S. Citizen, born June 30, 1930[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 795”]EDUCATION:
Ph.D. in Economics, University of Chicago, 1968
A.M. in Economics, Columbia University, 1959
A.B. in Economics, magna cum laude, Harvard College, 1958[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]EXPERIENCE:
Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, September 1980 – present
Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., September 1974 – June 1980
Visiting Professor of Economics, Amherst College, September 1977 – January 1978
Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, April – August 1977
Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, July 1976 – March 1977
Project Director, The Urban Institute, August 1972 – July 1974
Associate Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., September 1970 – June 1972
Associate Professor of Economics, Brandeis University, September 1969 – June 1970
Assistant Professor of Economics, Cornell University, September 1965 – June 1969
Economic Analyst, American Telephone & TelegraphCo., June 1964 – August 1965
Lecturer in Economics, Howard University, September 1963 – June 1964
Instructor in Economics, Douglass College, Rutgers University, September 1962 – June 1963
Labor Economist, U.S. Department of Labor, June 1961 – August 1962
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]PRINCIPAL PUBLICATIONS: Discrimination and Disparities (2018) Wealth, Poverty and Politics, revised and enlarged edition (2016)
[I]Intellectuals and Society /I
[I]On Classical Economics /I
[I]Black Rednecks and White Liberals /I
[I]Affirmative Action Around the World /I The Vision of the Anointed (1995) Race and Culture: A World View (1994 ) A Conflict of Visions (1987) Knowledge and Decisions (1980) Say’s Law: An Historical Analysis (1972)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
As for Shelby Steele, he’s another longtime columnist and well regarded conservative academic and writer. He’s also a really interesting person to listen to in terms of interviews he’s done. He’s the opposite of so much of the inflammatory and hyper political type of pundits and commentators that define so much of our National discussion on issues of race in America today. Shelby Steele is a calm, deep thinking, resorted and respectful intellectual. Well worth listening to and reading and thinking about what he has to say on important issues.
Here is some background information about him, and the MANY thought provoking books he’s written on the topic of race in America…
Shelby Steele is the Robert J. and Marion E. Oster Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. He specializes in the study of race relations, multiculturalism, and affirmative action. He was appointed a Hoover fellow in 1994.
Steele has written widely on race in American society and the consequences of contemporary social programs on race relations.
In 2006, Steele received the Bradley Prize for his contributions to the study of race in America. In 2004, he was awarded the National Humanities Medal. In 1991, his work on the documentary Seven Days in Bensonhurst was recognized with an Emmy Award and two awards for television documentary writing—the Writer’s Guild Award and the San Francisco Film Festival Award.
Steele received the National Book Critic’s Circle Award in 1990 in the general nonfiction category for his book The Content of Our Character: A New Vision of Race in America (HarperCollins, 1998). Other books by Steele include Shame: How America’s Past Sins Have Polarized Our Country (Basic Books, 2015), A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win (Free Press, 2007), White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era(HarperCollins, 2006) and A Dream Deferred: The Second Betrayal of Black Freedom in America (HarperCollins, 1998).
Steele has written extensively for major publications including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. He is a contributing editor at Harper’smagazine. He has also spoken before hundreds of groups and appeared on national current affairs news programs including Nightline and 60 Minutes.
Steele is a member of the National Association of Scholars, the national board of the American Academy for Liberal Education, the University Accreditation Association, and the national board at the Center for the New American Community at the Manhattan Institute.
Steele holds a PhD in English from the University of Utah, an MA in sociology from Southern Illinois University, and a BA in political science from Coe College, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
How so? Why was this a total non-issue until Leslie Wylie et.al. ginned up an excuse to be OUTRAGED about something no one else in the Galaxy is on record about being upset about? The problem with crying Wolf! about racism that is not racism( this is most definitely not) is that pretty soon that word loses all it’s real meaning and people tune it out. It’s an insulting and condescending spectacle to see white people telling black people they need to be outraged about racism. How dare we. The brutality and viciousness that African Americans have overcome in this country and will continue to overcome is due to their efforts, sacrifices and bravery, not some privileged white fool with a penchant for stirring shit. So it’s all for nothing. Everyone involved loses. Everyone. Well played EN and USEA.
I hope this gets read by those who need to read it and I hope they search these individuals out and actually read some of what they have to say with an open mind.
