(CHICAGO, IL – June 30, 2008) It was a couple of days before the Belmont Stakes, at a party held in a fancy place built on the grounds of the old Roosevelt Raceway, when a high-ranking administrator of The Jockey Club tried to make fun of my horseraceinsider.com column and me with the question, “How’s that blog of yours going?”

He didn’t ask, “How’s that blog of yours going?” with the admiration of someone who enjoyed reading my opinions. No, he asked, “How’s that blog of yours going?” with a snooty sort of down-your-nose manner that would cause me to think he was clever, and I was not.

Heck, I’ve been insulted before for my writing. But, as far as insults go, this wasn’t nearly as cutting as the one by the Barbaro fanatic who, upon reading a less-than-reverential piece that I wrote about the horse, commented, “You need Crest Whitestrips.” Nevertheless, when I learned that The Jockey Club guy didn’t respect Internet writing because much of it doesn’t pass the desk of an editor, suddenly I had something new to get worked up about.

Editors have helped me with things that I’ve written, and they’ve also kept me from writing things I wanted published. Don’t think for a minute that this is a country in which anyone can express himself freely on any topic. Sure, you can wear a sign and pronounce bizarre thoughts to a crowd on a busy street corner. But writing for an industry-supported magazine or interviewing those in charge of the sport on television, when the sport needs the network more than the network needs the sport, are entirely different matters.

A few weeks ago, “Meet the Press” host Tim Russert passed away and all memories of that evening on Long Island were rekindled. Like me, Russert spent his formative years on the South Side of Buffalo, NY, and much of the paeans expressed in memoriam were about being the son of a city worker, growing up a Catholic and cheering the Bills on – all circumstances I could relate to. Ironically, the guy from The Jockey Club is also from Buffalo. But that’s where Russert and I and he parted.

One of the intriguing dichotomies revealed at the requiem was Russert’s ability to remain well liked while slicing his subjects up with the cold-hearted mien of an executioner. Few people can accomplish delicate surgery with ham-fisted hands that once loaded a garbage truck, although he could. “I hadn’t had so much fun since my last interrogation in prison camp,” John McCain recalled, for example, suggesting the presidential candidate’s verbal bouts with the NBC newsman entailed, nonetheless, a wee bit of bonhomie.

On the other hand, the former Louisiana State Representative David Duke, an arch supremacist, can tell you how the emasculating edge of Russert’s scalpel could expose prejudices. The phony politician, once a Clansman, failed to realize that running for governor on a platform of economic reform would lead Russert to ask him about companies and jobs, thus revealing his ill-preparedness.

Likewise, George W. Bush never imagined the son of Big Russ could stop him from wrapping the scraps of Iraq in camouflage. The president seemed dazed when Russert raised a concept as simple as admission by asking the commander-in-chief if the invasion was “one of choice or necessity.” In 2000, the vice-president Al Gore couldn’t exit a Russert interview unruffled. He stammered, too, in answering a barrage of questions about abortion.

Horse racing has its Russerts. They come down to a handful of writers who work for the daily newspapers that still cover the abandoned sport. The trade journals can’t act responsibly because they’re beholden to an advertising base that reacts to criticism by holding back ad money. The network Web sites compare the number of readers that horse racing gets to baseball, football and basketball audiences, so they won’t budget to pay for original writing. They merely lift news from other outlets.

The result is that abuses mount far in excess of what they should before the kettle bubbles over. How long have some of the country’s leading trainers allowed their veterinarians to use illegal medications that have skirted detection? Why the hands-off treatment of thoroughbred breeders? Are they not partially to blame for the endless racing season, fragile horses and early retirement of marketable equine stars? This mess that the sport is in didn’t happen overnight.

Listen carefully the next time you hear an industry operative explain that horse racing can organize itself without Congressional assistance. Pay attention to the statements, hung like wallpaper, that emanate from the dialogue, and ask yourself if it were you in a room with him, wouldn’t there be more that you’d like to hear? The appeasement-tinged challenges served up by the media are so glib that neither inquisitor nor inquisi-tee feels uneasy. Moreover, doesn’t any TV interviewer sense the need for clarifying, follow-up questions?

An aggressive press is essential to any industry that expects to prosper. Criticism is a check that preserves the balance which good enterprise thrives on. My guy from The Jockey Club may prefer stylebook conformity, but he shouldn’t take lightly the maverick press that is doing the job that conventional forums cannot. The Internet is coming on strong, and the growing number of reader/writers that commands its bandwidth is a force to be reckoned with.

David Remnick, in observing Russert’s legacy for The New Yorker, determined that Russert was defined by what he wasn’t, instead of what he was. Remnick wrote, “Beyond his family, Russert’s passion was politics, and he cared enough about the game to try to keep it, and its players, honest.”

To a certain extent, in the realm of horse racing, isn’t that what bloggers are trying to accomplish? Isn’t that why the Internet deserves the respect of the establishment? My blog’s doing just fine, Mr. Jockey Club. How’s that sport of yours getting on?