PETA undercover in Asmussen's barn - Whoa!

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

Whoever made that petagirl.com website is just as slimy as they accuse the girl of being. Completely classless to call her all those degrading names and give out her number. At least stick to the issue of the horses.

SOP for the internet. A female causes trouble? She's a SLUT!

I agree that the site doesn't help the issue at all. It just makes horse racing come across as misogynistic, too.

And fact is, there's plenty in that video to criticize. It's poorly done propaganda (voice over? Srsly?). It really depends on Blasi swearing like a fleet of sailors to obscure some of what he's actually saying (racehorses will "break your heart" ever time, which isn't what someone who doesn't care about them would say) and, after a lot of complaining, stating that he didn't have an issue with a horse being scratched. Ooh! Smoking gun!

The biggest issues are, I think, the allegations of fake Social Security IDs and if that's true, Asmussen is going to be in a lot of trouble with the IRS, but that doesn't have anything to do with PETA's agenda. But honestly, I couldn't really make out from the video exactly what Asmussen was saying, which is why I think the video relied so heavily on voice-over to convince people they were seeing what PETA wanted them to see.

And that's what I wish racing would take on- say, "Hey, what's on the remaining seven hours? Why aren't you showing anyone that?" Because, having watched the video, if that's the best they could get, with all of the hours of video, it's pretty weak sauce. But no one is calling them on it, probably because everyone is listening to the voice-over.

Here's a piece from Slate on deceptive editing:
http://www.slate.com/articles/video/...a_footage.html

In this case it's about an abortion clinic, but it's the same premise- undercover "clients" and hidden cameras. But it's a great look at selective editing in service to an agenda.