Censorship on Bloodhorse

SniperSB23 · #1 11-09-2006, 12:27 PM

I didn't get a chance to read the article this morning but apparently Haskin's BC roundup article was up this morning and questioned Darley retiring Bernardini and how sporting they really are. The article has since been removed from the site. This sport is unreal, all it wants is fluff pieces. You write something negative about the sport and they censor it. Just seach for 'Haskin' on bloodhorse.com and the article comes up. Unfortunately when you click the link you get a message saying "We are truly sorry, the story you are trying to access was time sensitive and is no longer available."

brianwspencer · #2 11-09-2006, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I didn't get a chance to read the article this morning but apparently Haskin's BC roundup article was up this morning and questioned Darley retiring Bernardini and how sporting they really are. The article has since been removed from the site. This sport is unreal, all it wants is fluff pieces. You write something negative about the sport and they censor it. Just seach for 'Haskin' on bloodhorse.com and the article comes up. Unfortunately when you click the link you get a message saying "We are truly sorry, the story you are trying to access was time sensitive and is no longer available."

it's right here: http://www.bloodhorse.com/articleind...e.asp?id=36300

i read it last night, and had no trouble finding it just now.

SniperSB23 · #3 11-09-2006, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

it's right here: http://www.bloodhorse.com/articleind...e.asp?id=36300

i read it last night, and had no trouble finding it just now.

Ha, awesome. It wasn't available fifteen minutes ago and they just got a bunch of angry e-mails from fans. The date posted is also changed from November 8th to November 9th. Glad to see they put it back up.

SniperSB23 · #4 11-09-2006, 12:48 PM

Apparently Haskin was contacted via e-mail that the article was gone and contacted an online editor to get it back up. Perhaps it was just an on-line glitch that just happened to be in a negative article towards Darley rather than censorship.

blackthroatedwind · #5 11-09-2006, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Apparently Haskin was contacted via e-mail that the article was gone and contacted an online editor to get it back up. Perhaps it was just an on-line glitch that just happened to be in a negative article towards Darley rather than censorship.

You have a direct line to Haskin?

#6 11-09-2006, 12:54 PM

Trust me when I tell you the Blood-Horse doesn't censor. I know that first-hand.

However, several different people are responsible for posting stories to the website and sometimes things get moved around and links are dropped by mistake. The "time sensitive" thing is an auto response.

blackthroatedwind · #7 11-09-2006, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redransom

Trust me when I tell you the Blood-Horse doesn't censor. I know that first-hand.

What does that mean?

They are certainly sensitive of many issues. Are you honestly suggesting they will print pretty much anything?

Cajungator26 · #8 11-09-2006, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

What does that mean?

They are certainly sensitive of many issues. Are you honestly suggesting they will print pretty much anything?

She's suggesting that she writes articles for the Blood-Horse (which she does.)

SniperSB23 · #9 11-09-2006, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You have a direct line to Haskin?

No, but he does a very good job of responding to e-mails and responded to the e-mail that alerted him to the issue.

blackthroatedwind · #10 11-09-2006, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

No, but he does a very good job of responding to e-mails and responded to the e-mail that alerted him to the issue.

He's just glad to have a fan!

Cajungator26 · #11 11-09-2006, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He's just glad to have a fan!

HAHA!!!

I thought that was a good article in all seriousness. He brought up some good points.

blackthroatedwind · #12 11-09-2006, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

She's suggesting that she writes articles for the Blood-Horse (which she does.)

Are there any other questions you answer for her?

I don't particularly agree with her post whether she writes for them or not.

Cajungator26 · #13 11-09-2006, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Are there any other questions you answer for her?

I don't particularly agree with her post whether she writes for them or not.

Nah... I've just read a few of her articles and figured that was what she was talking about.

SniperSB23 · #14 11-09-2006, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He's just glad to have a fan!

I'm a fan of anyone that writes an article questioning how sporting the Sheikhs are or how good they are for the game. The one T Times article yesterday that praised the Sheikhs for being sporting by racing Invasor against Bernardini but neglected to mention them not racing Dubai Escapade or Discreet Cat or Ashkal Way made me want to puke.

#15 11-09-2006, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

What does that mean?

They are certainly sensitive of many issues. Are you honestly suggesting they will print pretty much anything?

Um, what? I didn't think my comment needed to be clarified. But I will regardless....

If it's newsworthy and it steps on toes, even the biggest toes in the game, the BH will still print/publish it. As far as I'm concerned there's really no hard-nosed journalism in horseracing, but the BH isn't afraid to print anything and, so far in six years of working for them, they have. Whether it be editorials or whatever...

Now that's not to say some people's jobs aren't geared toward the less controversial. Haskin, for example, isn't a newswriter. He's a features writer and there's a different direction than someone who does mostly news.

But the BH is a publication owned by the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders' Association and, therefore, designed to promote the industry.

blackthroatedwind · #16 11-09-2006, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redransom

Um, what? I didn't think my comment needed to be clarified. But I will regardless....

If it's newsworthy and it steps on toes, even the biggest toes in the game, the BH will still print/publish it. As far as I'm concerned there's really no hard-nosed journalism in horseracing, but the BH isn't afraid to print anything and, so far in six years of working for them, they have. Whether it be editorials or whatever...

Now that's not to say some people's jobs aren't geared toward the less controversial. Haskin, for example, isn't a newswriter. He's a features writer and there's a different direction than someone who does mostly news.

But the BH is a publication owned by the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders' Association and, therefore, designed to promote the industry.

I don't agree with the second paragraph....though I do agree about the lack of hard-nosed journalism in Racing ( over all ) and surely Ray has done a great job with the Jess Jackson story.

blackthroatedwind · #17 11-09-2006, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I'm a fan of anyone that writes an article questioning how sporting the Sheikhs are or how good they are for the game. The one T Times article yesterday that praised the Sheikhs for being sporting by racing Invasor against Bernardini but neglected to mention them not racing Dubai Escapade or Discreet Cat or Ashkal Way made me want to puke.

I couldn't agree more. I liked this piece by Haskin and he's a great guy.

#18 11-09-2006, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I don't agree with the second paragraph....though I do agree about the lack of hard-nosed journalism in Racing ( over all ) and surely Ray has done a great job with the Jess Jackson story.

Okay, that's the beauty of it all... not agreeing. And Ray has stepped on a lot of toes (as have several of his cohorts) in the name of doing the right thing and reporting as is. Think, for example, of the ethics in sales stuff and double commissions, Jockeys' Guild, California racing, NYRA, bogus horse ownership lawsuits, drug testing, etc. The BH has covered it all, objectively I believe. And many, many people came away angry. Mission accomplished? I dunno, but I think so...

I, unfortunately, have first hand experience with the BH stepping firmly on very large toes and me having to go back for more info. Not a terribly friendly situation often times.

blackthroatedwind · #19 11-09-2006, 01:19 PM

I wouldn't say the reprinting of Empire's press releases has been hard hitting journalism in the case of NYRA.

Danzig · #20 11-09-2006, 01:24 PM

i know back when the jocks were negotiating with manley bloodhorse had no problem in questioning his credentials, and suggesting he was a bad choice and that the guild could do better...matter of fact, i was kind of surprised that they went as far as they did.