This was published this morning: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/nyregion/shooting-dressage-social-media.html?searchResultPosition=1
I am a bit disappointed in the slant of the article considering the number of people Sarah Nir interviewed who had had previous negative encounters with LK.
The interview by Sarah Nir has come out in the NYTimes.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/n…ial-media.html
It seems to be a thorough article about the online saga side of the event. I thought Nir did a good job of explaining the history of online bullying by Kanarek as well as the making the clear point that she was shot by Barisone and put into a coma to recover from her wounds, and it wasn’t until a week later that she could go home. Interestingly, she emphasizes that Barisone says he shot her in self defense.
Well written, and doesn’t skip much detail, the article really describes accurately what happened online and doesn’t hold back giving examples of people who have been having bullying problems from LK, including Girl Joey stuff. Interesting article which takes absolutely no side when describing everything, including COTH. The topic of the story is the online reaction of people who commented about her taking no responsibility for herself, while being fair to present Kanarek’s side of things, for good or bad.
Hmmm… after merging two threads on this article, the system seems to have lost some of the posts. My apologies for the loss of your comments. I’ll be contacting the developers to see if there is a bug in the merge function. Please feel free to repost. We’ve also re-opened the original thread on this topic if you want to continue the discussion there instead.
@Another Round-Methinks you need another round. That was an inaccurate poorly researched article, probably written before morning coffee while still in her pjs.
Are you sad she didn’t use your name? I admit, we had a good laugh about all the people who were calling & calling the Time’s & other publications begging to give a statement non-anonymously. The only two people they found could somewhat “balance,” the article consisted of a woman I fired & a woman who is upset her boyfriend is a person dated in high school. In short, a disgruntled ex employee & a disgruntled … random nobody. But not you! Don’t fret. They both only got a sentence of allowed character space. I could have easily responded to their accusations in my interview. But… that would’ve allowed them an extra few words in an article having nothing to do with them.
In fact, even MB’s attorney wanted less than nothing to do with either of them. However, delusional as they maybe, they both are under the false impression they will be called as witnesses for the defense. Again, MB’s attorney refused to even entertain the idea of calling as witnesses two people MB is denying he ever called - spoke with- or heard of. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. The article was fair & well rounded. And… you know it. Deal w it.
I’m sorry. I’m confused. Which thread has been reopened on this topic? I’m not very familiar with the settings here. Thanks in advance!
I think you read a different article. Girl Joey and the Braider I fired received a total of 3 lines collectively. Further, my hospital stay was 29 days & at no point whatsoever has anyone claimed “self defense.” Which is why those words are in fine print & authored by a different reporter helping with the article.
In error, we received an email Nir had written to MB’s attorney. It’s quite interesting. Especially, since he has yet to respond. Knowing quite a bit more about this case than say… ANYONE else… I can say with absolute certainty that Nir messed up a great many detail. But, I like her. And, her article will definitely be a great help to the prosecution. Had she used names with any credibility to attempt to discredit me… it would be, as they say, a different story. Luckily, it’s not!
Did you just… revive a completely dead thread to complain about people’s reactions to an article?
Someone’s impatient to get back in the headlines. Look, we’re in middle of a pandemic. You’re just not that important anymore, nor will you ever be - you’re yesterdays news. Boring.
@La-LaPopRider This thread was dead, had not been posted to in over a year. You posted and bumped it back up. You are why the thread is active again.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
