Here from the EHV article Archy

[Bristol_Bay]

I’m not defending anyone. It’s a small world here in the east valley and we probably know a lot of the same riders and trainers. You can read my posts in the original 2022 thread for how much we were impacted. I probably crossed paths with Marlo and Nero at that fateful horse show.

I thought the article was beautifully written as well as timely since the virus seems to resurface in the spring.

What I found specifically trollish was a first time poster who admits not being familiar with the events in the article creating this thread to stir the pot.

I’m very sorry for what happened to your friend, but it sounds like she’s found a great situation to continue riding and I hope she’s making better memories with Kate at FRC.

[skydy]

@riot

Troll away! You must be new.

What is it lately that has people so short tempered? There’s no need to get snippy and personal. @Bristol_Bay has been a member here for 12 years. I believe that is longer than you have been here.

Bristol Bay doesn’t come to mind when I think of trollish behavior on COTH.

I feel terrible for the lady whose horse died because of the indifference of others, and I really hope that there have been repercussions. EVH-1 can’t be taken lightly and hopefully anybody who breaks the new biosecurity rules will have the book thrown at them.

Granted, as books go, USEF uses a thin paperback as consequences for rule violations, so it doesn’t hurt much when they throw it at you.

[pony_grandma]

[Tha_Ridge]

First and foremost, I think this is a heartbreaking story and it really made me think about the risk we, knowingly or otherwise, expose our horses to everyday. But I do think the premise was weakened by a lack of basic fact-checking on COTH’s behalf, as I personally only found one grey horse (a pony, actually) in the author’s classes and it had not been at DIHP, per USEF records. So unless the author misremembered or embellished a little for the sake of her story, that part doesn’t add up.

[vxf111]

@Tha_Ridge

So unless the author misremembered or embellished a little for the sake of her story, that part doesn’t add up.

Or perhaps intentionally changed some details to make it impossible to track who she believed the horse/barn was because she wasn’t really trying to point fingers at anyone in specific by telling her story but rather draw awareness to the entire situation?

[Tha_Ridge]

You’re right, but speaking journalistically, that’s usually disclosed when that’s done, hence my emphasize that the sloppiness here lies with COTH’s lack of editing/journalistic rigor, not the author.

[NaturallyHappy]

Several years ago, I was interviewed for “Amateurs Like Us” and recorded during the interview. I was not permitted to proof the article. The write up had many inaccuracies.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

That must have been frustrating.

[Mardi1]

@NaturallyHappy

Several years ago, I was interviewed for “Amateurs Like Us” and recorded during the interview. I was not permitted to proof the article. The write up had many inaccuracies.

Were the inaccuracies corrected in a later issue ?,

[riot]

I can almost bet that this author was being careful. The point is we all know the trainers, we know they made the decision they shouldn’t have. I have my horses down the road from Archie, my trainer also is close friends with him. This man knows what he is doing, always has and always will. He’s smarter than the average bear and USEF knows not to poke that bear. I wait for the day karma hits.

[vxf111]

It’s not the first time I’ve though they should have exerted more editorial control.

[NaturallyHappy]

@Mardi1, they weren’t. My big takeaway was to read everything w a grain of salt.

[LazyA1]

Perhaps you’re wrong. Maybe you are maybe you’re not. This detail does not ruin things for me. Maybe it was a bay, so what.

[Ghazzu]

@NaturallyHappy

Several years ago, I was interviewed for “Amateurs Like Us” and recorded during the interview. I was not permitted to proof the article. The write up had many inaccuracies.

I’ve had a couple experiences like that.
Once with Equus magazine, once with a local city newspaper.

[CBoylen]

This also happened to me the last time I spoke to the COTH. It was mortifying, as they conflated a bunch of things, misidentified the person I was talking about in a particular instance, and quoted me on it.

[riot]

It’s neither here nor there. The horse could have been a 10 hand Shetland. The issue is several trainers, one being “Archy” as the poster mentioned, after selfishly and contributed to the quick spread of EHV, what many of us suffered through.

[Tha_Ridge]

Well, it bothers me because it’s largely this sort of lazy “reporting” and editorial integrity that has sowed distrust in the media as a whole—it’s an issue that extends well beyond our little corner of the world.

[LazyA1]

Respectfully disagree. There is the type reporting that sows distrust and the type that doesn’t. Whether the horse was grey or bay, or in the class or in the next stall does not detract from THIS article. Nor is this author running for president. Nor is this author on the staff. She is a guest writer. Do we really want to pay $200 per issue of the Chronicle so we can be assured that every little word is correct? We can all read with a healthy realization that there can be error without going into full-on conspiracy theorism. And for all your sleuthing, she could be right or so could you. Grey horse in the class, another color, another means of exposure, same diff. It’s not like there is a grey horse on trial. The article retains its value.

[Tha_Ridge]

A guest writer does not supercede a publication’s editorial standards, hard stop. I have had multiple bylines in COTH before, by the way, but my bread and butter is everything from market-moving financial news to much more “fluffy” things, and the bottom line is that, yes, as a journalist, you are expected that every little world is correct. You are not exempt from that as a guest writer or “blogger,” but in that case, the onus falls upon the publication. If you don’t expect 100% accuracy from the publications you read (not blogs, not forums, not social media, mind you), I’d gladly recommend some new reading material.

[Bearx2]

“*Proving a direct epidemiological link between horses is scientifically very unlikely, I learned from the state vet sent to assess Nero’s case.”

I took this quote directly from the article above and it shows that nobody can be 100% certain which horse spread the disease to the author’s horse . So while I would like for someone to just come out and name names I can understand why the magazine doesn’t want to do that.