Horse Race – Is it Morally Right to Force Horses to Run For Their Lives?
Horse races are exciting events that capture the imagination of millions of fans worldwide. Behind the romanticized facade of the sport, however, lies a world of injuries, drug abuse and gruesome breakdowns. Despite these issues, the horse racing industry is working hard to protect horses, improve track conditions and advance veterinary care. While many fans still place a high value on the sport’s rich traditions, some critics question whether it is morally right to force these magnificent animals to run for their lives.
In a horse race, bettors place money on the winning horse by placing a bet on either Win, Place or Show. A bet on all three pays out only if the horse wins, but a win and place bet pays out if the horse finishes in first or second position. A player can also place a bet on one or more of the top five finishers, called the top-5 bets.
A race is held on a flat oval-shaped track, often with a dirt surface or turf. The horses are ridden by jockeys who must follow the course and jump any hurdles (if present) while maintaining control of their mount. The horses are forced to run at very fast speeds, causing them to be prone to injuries and equine mental disorders, such as crib-biting, a repetitive oral behaviour, and weaving, a habitual, repetitive behaviour where the animal sways on its forelegs and shifts its weight back and forth.
Horses are social, plains-ranging animals, but are often kept in isolation and close confinement when they become racehorses. The strain of being forced to sprint and the constant exposure to whipping and electric shock devices can lead to behavioural problems such as crib-biting, colic and laminitis. Many of these horses are later sent to slaughter for their meat and fur.
The term “horse race” is also used to describe the political coverage of elections by some news outlets, which critics say concentrate on front-runners vying for public support and give little or no attention to other candidates who may be gaining ground. A growing number of scholars have studied this type of reporting and found it can negatively influence voters, candidates and the news industry itself.
For example, a study of the 2016 election by the Journalist’s Resource project at Harvard University found that journalists focused mainly on who was leading in the polls and ignored the fact that third-party candidates are getting more votes than Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. In addition, the studies found that news articles focusing on front-runners can be misleading to readers who may think that only two choices are available. The authors of the study argued that the reliance on horse race journalism should be replaced by more substantive coverage of national issues.