Another example of her total lack of professionalism and self-awareness.
11 Likes
Ha of course.
1 Like
She was concerned for the welfare of the horse. I don’t blame her for that. We still don’t know the full story and may never. Just because the owners of the horse own the NYT doesn’t mean the trainer isn’t showing a horse in open competition with a huge wound, spur rub or not.
8 Likes
Of course she can be concerned for the horse, but she needs to remember that she represents a publication that she likes to think represents the pinnacle of our sport. Along with that comes some responsibility regarding journalistic integrity and ethics, which were severely neglected here.
22 Likes
But clearly, there were many official eyes on this horse all week. Speculation and accusation via social media is a growing problem in our sport, whether it’s directed at riders, trainers, owners or horses. That’s no spur rub. I’m sure show management and stewards are well aware of what it really is. Let’s let them handle it.
17 Likes
Who owns the horse?
Exactly. The integrity piece is lacking here and in most of the communications I see from her.
2 Likes
Cynthia Sulzberger.
It’s a slippery slope - if she did in fact contact show officials in person at Devon and was brushed off I get the desire to amplify the issue however she can. I don’t believe she’s a malicious person but there seems to be different sentiment here.
I don’t think she is malicious, I think her post was ill-advised and lacking any semblance of journalistic integrity.
9 Likes
I’m not accusing her of malice. Lack of integrity? Yes. Lack of self-awareness? That too. I think she’s merely an attention seeker and doesn’t have enough knowledge to have malice.
11 Likes
Was she blown off or simply told something like - We are aware of this situation, thank you. Which is a polite way to say this is not what you think it is and it is none of your business what it actually is because this is not your horse so you are not allowed to demand details, just know that it is not what you are saying it is.
I also feel that if you start a storm like this you have an obligation to post something about taking it down, just not remove it.
15 Likes
Exactly. I also find it interesting that she only posted it on Instagram, not on Facebook (where she presumably has a larger adult following). I really think for what reason she wanted an angry pitchfork mob to go after USEF. Now they’ve also targeted the horse’s trainer on Instagram too.
1 Like
It seems like it be really easy for the horse’s team to say “hey, it’s a xxx” if it’s not a spur rub.
8 Likes
There is a new post on TPH Facebook page with some more information. She says she tried for 10 days and no one did anything, sounds like she felt the post was a last resort option to get someone’s attention (I’m not saying if I think this was right or wrong, just saying how it came across). I am curious how USEF will be “acting in the horses welfare”.
1 Like
I suppose it is.
But if it is truly something like a sarcoma that was removed, it is none of your (general) business.
We are talking about a horse that has a high dollar price tag, they do not need to (or likely want) the whole world discussing something like that.
7 Likes
I don’t think this makes her look any better.
9 Likes
I don’t disagree with you, I was just stating the fact of what she posted. I don’t think she should have used her platform in this way, seems like there were many other ways to go about this. She rubs me the wrong way in a lot of ways.
2 Likes
Quite the opposite: Journalistic integrity is reporting with truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, and public accountability no matter who you’re reporting on. Even if its the company you represent. (Note that I’m not commenting on her accuracy, only on WHO she’s implicating - she clearly believed her info was correct)
It sounds like she tried to report privately, then her ethics led her to report it publicly, but it’s likely some kind of behind the scenes situation forced her to remove it. I don’t know her publication so I can’t comment on the quality of it.
In horse sport we obviously all have a duty to call out abuse. I’m kinda surprised the horse owner hasn’t given a reason for this apparent wound so all the speculation can die down, but in my opinion it was unwise to show the horse no matter what the cause of that scar/wound.
For one it created drama, for two it makes horse sport look bad, but more importantly for three a wound that recent will be very sensitive and should be allowed to heal properly. It’s a horse show, where you show off your best horses in their best condition. A severe blemish like that should be penalized in a show horse. (US hunter rules are a mystery to me: interested to know if that’s anywhere in the rulebook?)
6 Likes
Why?
If they are being judged on their way of going, what does it matter if they have a scar or a healing injury if they still are able to perform?
I have never understood that theory. An old scar does not in any way ruin a horse’s ability to be functional.
Now, if this is a current sore spot that truly does align with the spur then it was out of line to show the horse. But something healed should never be an issue in a performance event.
Maybe on the line, where all they are looking for is pretty…
9 Likes
