Pictures *H&H plus* Welfare

[Koen]

I'm simply appalled that the majority of in-depth articles concerning horse welfare in the Horse&Hound are *H&H plus*. In other words only for paying subscribers. Surely this defeats the entire purpose of getting the welfare message out to everyone. Everyone includes everyone, even incidental readers involved in horses who are unlikely to take out a sub. In my opinion this just serves to sends the worst possible message, welfare is only for the elite readership. While it's perfectly possible for everyone and anyone subscriber or not to buy a horse off the Horse&Hound, looking after it is apparently only for subscribers. There doesn't seem to be much thought involved in the priorities with this at all. Is it in fact utterly random? In the spirit of Christmas and our horses welfare couldn't someone do something about this!
‘We all have our part to play in ending the horse crisis’ *H&H Plus*
Calls to rethink turnout measures for horses to benefit their welfare *H&H Plus
Who is responsible for horse welfare in our industry? *H&H Plus*
Calls for equine rescue licensing after ‘sanctuary’ welfare prosecution *H&H Plus*

More empty words!? Or is it a real commitment?

 

[SaharaS]

It even locks non plus members out of your links..
Completely agree this should be an immediate priority rethink

 

[tallyho!]

A very good point!

 

[Ownedby4horses]

I actually noticed this the other day, I think it’s appalling that H&H seem more concerned with getting money than issuing out the welfare articles for everyone to read. Good thread as something needs to change. ?

 

[cauda equina]

There was something about riding and road safety recently that was only on H&H plus; surely that's another thing that merits the widest possible readership

I've just tried to look at the OP's links. I think I might cancel my sub to the magazine and join H&H plus instead

 

[TPO]

How do you propose they make money to pay the wages of the writers who have spent hours creating the articles?

I can't believe that people think H&H should give away even more free content (along with a free forum).

Of course it's an important topic and it would be hoped, by the editor at least I'd presume, that the headlines would encourage people to buy the magazine and/or subscribe. Simple marketing.

 

[honetpot]

I have been a email subscriber to, The Horse – Your Guide to Equine Health Care , since about 2009. The quality of the free content makes H&H look like OK magazine.

 

[honetpot]

How do you propose they make money to pay the wages of the writers who have spent hours creating the articles?

I can't believe that people think H&H should give away even more free content (along with a free forum).

Of course it's an important topic and it would be hoped, by the editor at least I'd presume, that the headlines would encourage people to buy the magazine and/or subscribe. Simple marketing.

Its not really free, it sells advertising, and the advertisers obviously hope its targeted at a certain sort of customer.
Welfare information, even if only links to other websites who are experts in the field, should be free. The horse world is now rife with misinformation and sales pitches that care more about sales than horse welfare.

 

[Scotsbadboy]

This is appalling, how dare they make a living whilst also offering free content and a forum. I think they should be flogged and no Xmas pudding for them scumbags thats for sure!!!

The only welfare issue here is this post!

 

[ycbm]

The forum is free to use. It pays for itself both by advertising the online and paper magazine and by selling click through to advertisers.

If it made no money it would stop tomorrow. IPC magazines don't provide it out of the goodness of their hearts, bless 'em. (Though I'm still grateful it's here)
.

 

[Micropony]

This is all fair, but I do feel it's a pity they haven't found a way to join up print subscriptions with H&H Plus. Having paid for the content once, I am not about to pay again to access it online for those occasions where it's more convenient or for the odd video clip perhaps, so they are losing an opportunity to serve more ads to me.

 

[Koen]

This is all fair, but I do feel it's a pity they haven't found a way to join up print subscriptions with H&H Plus. Having paid for the content once, I am not about to pay again to access it online for those occasions where it's more convenient or for the odd video clip perhaps, so they are losing an opportunity to serve more ads to me.

Another very good point. This is like drawing blood from an already rather exhausted cash cow IMO. Physical prints are a fast dying format.

What some of the posters here seem to be forgetting but which "honetpot" has already accurately pointed out is that advertising not subs both online and the printed edition are what makes the H&H their real money, this is true for almost every publication today, particularly online publications of course. They would have long disappeared were this not true. The H&H is no different.

Yes you can of course get the absolutely free one weeks sub online but who is going to do that just to read about any single welfare issue unless they already have that as their priority. These articles should not have profit as their motive, I don't care who is writing them, be it Carl Hester, Scott Brash or Eleanor Jonsie. Not when so much of the other far less important to our horses welfare news, commercials, sales and general news is free for anyone to read. If a writer/rider columnist decides to tackle a welfare issue maybe they should insist it be open for all to read, even just for that single contribution. This wasn't the case when for example Carl Hester wrote his piece on the issue of Endurance savagery which was more like utter insanity in my opinion. No exceptions it seems. Wouldn't his voice have mattered far far more to our horses welfare had it had the widest possible audience by being open to all and all subscribers. Absolutely yes.

Linked to a plea for subscriptions perhaps? Stick carrot H&H?

It's not difficult linking an appeal for subscriptions to welfare articles should they be free. I would think given that we should all have welfare as our priority these could be rather successful appeals at that.

Definitely a ballsed up priority issue.

 

[Keira 8888]

Totally agree

 

[Caol Ila]

It's a tough one -- they've paid me to write stuff for them, so I am all about them paying writers and get why they charge for articles. However, as a consumer of news and other online content, I quite like free stuff, which makes me a terrible hypocrite, but I can't afford to pay for a subscription of everything I want to read. That would add up.

There's better models, though. Some publications let you access X free articles per month. If you're as addicted to it as I am to the NY Times, you'll pay your subscription, as I do with the NY Times, but if it's something you only look at occasionally, you can quite happily read an article or two for free. Arguably, this might even increase subscriptions. If you can read a couple articles from a magazine for free, you might end up taking out a subscription if you love the writing so much that you want more. On the other hand, if you can't access it at all, you'll probably not bother.

 

[Koen]

‘We all have our part to play in ending the horse crisis’ *H&H Plus*

At the risk of repeating myself.......Apparently not. Only *H&H Plusers* do.

I'm also all for magazines paying writers/riders experts. These articles should be either free based on advertising revenues or not as they see fit which is as it stands of course, some are free others not. However welfare articles and advice should always be accessible to everyone not selectively accessible doesn't matter who is writing them. Far more important for the horse of course particularly if they're important voices that already command some degree of respect. There's really no point in only a closed section of readership being able to access horse welfare pieces, none at all. Why bother publishing them. The majority will never take out a subscription what ever they do, but they may read those welfare articles at least. Generally speaking welfare issues are hardly the main attraction for subscribers of H&H. Of course everyone should want to be up to date on these issues, and so they should be allowed to be IMO.

 

[TPO]

The people who most need educated are unlikely to be reading articles about welfare, free or not.

Theres nothing new under the sun and I'd bet all the info in the H&H article can already be found online if anyone cared to look.

I'm not sure what people think that they are missing out on or why they are putting some strange onus on H&H to spread this information freely.

I thought H&H already offered options for print and/or online subscribers to access the Plus portion of their site.

I really like shoes and I need shoes so I think Louboutin should give me a couple of free pairs and that would tempt me to buy a third pair, maybe...?

 

[Koen]

The people who most need educated are unlikely to be reading articles about welfare, free or not.

Theres nothing new under the sun and I'd bet all the info in the H&H article can already be found online if anyone cared to look.

I'm not sure what people think that they are missing out on or why they are putting some strange onus on H&H to spread this information freely.

I thought H&H already offered options for print and/or online subscribers to access the Plus portion of their site.

I really like shoes and I need shoes so I think Louboutin should give me a couple of free pairs and that would tempt me to buy a third pair, maybe...?

No I dont think anyone likes cruelty to animals so wants to read the welfare articles for free which would encourage subscriptions so they can read more of them. As sexy as Louboutin shoes may be that's still an outrageously whacky idea, just very confused. All of it, I think sadly for you. Tis the season perhaps, burp.

Not everyone is able to understand plainly. Nonetheless it's still a good opportunity to make it plain.

Bottom line . I believe it's rather thoughtlessly odd of the editor-in-chief Sarah Jenkins that any of the welfare articles are *H&Hplus*. It certainly looks on the face of it rather glaringly remiss to me.

I've always thought so, every time I click on H&H online I think so. Distractingly so. I still haven't even yet read why Dujardin got a 90 at the British Nationals, seems a bit generous to me last I looked.....Euro Dressage might be less distracting in that department but then their entire contents are free, advertorial revenue and commission based which also rather astutely doesn't show in the slightest. In fact given it's nature it only adds rather heftily to the content . So it should. But that's an entirely different subject of course, and rightly none of my buisness when it comes to H&H.

 

[TPO]

Ha ha, excellent come back that because you can't justify why you feel entitled to people's work and a company's product for free I must be drunk? Gid yin ??

If you care so much about what is in H&H plus pay for it; that is the bottom line. It is a product there to be sold.

Your theory that they should give it away freely to encourage subscriptions is exactly what they are doing. They give away lots of free content and then you pay for the Plus. I'm not sure what it is that you are failing to grasp. Should they now give away articles in Plus to the likes of you and then what, hope that you subscribe to a new Platinum section? Until that is you start stamping your feet wanting that for free too? ? jog on

 

[honetpot]

The people who most need educated are unlikely to be reading articles about welfare, free or not.

Theres nothing new under the sun and I'd bet all the info in the H&H article can already be found online if anyone cared to look.

I'm not sure what people think that they are missing out on or why they are putting some strange onus on H&H to spread this information freely.

I thought H&H already offered options for print and/or online subscribers to access the Plus portion of their site.

I really like shoes and I need shoes so I think Louboutin should give me a couple of free pairs and that would tempt me to buy a third pair, maybe...?

The main selling point for advertisers, is brand value, that a brand attracts people who will hopefully buy their products, and the advertising team will have a sales pitch and hopefully worked out the demographic. Just look at the flash ads on the forum.
I often wonder who they think H&H is aimed at now, the content is more like a cheap mag, I have seen free advertising mags at the feed store with better welfare content. Most advertisers are looking for new customers to sell to and the newer owner/rider is most likely to buy new products and need advice.
I subscribed for twenty odd years, I stopped when I found out that they had not reported a UK endurance event truthfully, I knew someone who was a steward at the event, and then there was the head in the sand reporting of the BHS. I also think BHS welfare articles should be free as well, at least online.
Good quality welfare advice from a trusted source should be freely available, education for welfare purposes should be free, and if you are in the business of making money from horses I think it's a moral obligation. It certainly is in my job, which is health care.

 

[ester]

This is all fair, but I do feel it's a pity they haven't found a way to join up print subscriptions with H&H Plus. Having paid for the content once, I am not about to pay again to access it online for those occasions where it's more convenient or for the odd video clip perhaps, so they are losing an opportunity to serve more ads to me.

They have?
They frequently mention it when they post a plus article on facebook.

hmm eta its only a different version of the free trial, then you have to do combined.
https://www.horseandhound.co.uk/fre...huR4_EkVQVLE8YnmEZt2rwA3DPgYV8ETjt43NvFMKlwsE

 

[Micropony]

Ah thanks Ester, I thought I had missed a trick there!

 

[Koen]

The main selling point for advertisers, is brand value, that a brand attracts people who will hopefully buy their products, and the advertising team will have a sales pitch and hopefully worked out the demographic. Just look at the flash ads on the forum.
I often wonder who they think H&H is aimed at now, the content is more like a cheap mag, I have seen free advertising mags at the feed store with better welfare content. Most advertisers are looking for new customers to sell to and the newer owner/rider is most likely to buy new products and need advice.
I subscribed for twenty odd years, I stopped when I found out that they had not reported a UK endurance event truthfully, I knew someone who was a steward at the event, and then there was the head in the sand reporting of the BHS. I also think BHS welfare articles should be free as well, at least online.
Good quality welfare advice from a trusted source should be freely available, education for welfare purposes should be free, and if you are in the business of making money from horses I think it's a moral obligation. It certainly is in my job, which is health care.

Well said.

There is also yes an awful lot of pure click bait on H&H online, absolutely this feeds revenue straight to H&H each and every time someone clicks on that stuff. Most of it is pure trash and nothing to do with H&H opinion or paid content if indeed it's even about horses. Fair enough if that's the direction they want to take the mag. Of course it's tacky and does horribly reduce the notion of the historic and trusted H&H but apparently all avenues are fair game to be monetised. This include most of the strictly welfare articles.

I feel if you want to get paid for writing welfare articles and someone is prepared to pay you for doing that fair enough but to restrict their readership is ridiculous, isn't the click bait revenue enough to cover these few welfare articles..... the readers are still in fact generating that cash for H&H, subscribers or bl**dy not! Yes.

Wonder if any of the tabloids have a direct hand in the revenue format of the H&H because it's beginning to look blue print online tabloid. I had noticed that for quite a few years already. Rather sad IMO. I read a rather broad selection of online material so it doesn't bother me too much. There are definately still some terrific mags out there when you think Australia and the Continent etc.

So not all gloomy, tis the season hey TPO! A very Merry christmas to you....and everyone.

 

[Caol Ila]

The articles which are basically advertising copy for insurance companies, however, are free. Just sayin'.