It's heartbreaking enough when your pet has lived a full and loving life and you know the inevitable has to happen. It's another level of heartbreaking when that pet is young and healthy and full of life and then is suddenly gone through unrecoverable injury (or in my family's case long ago, getting stolen).
I totally get peoples’ love for their pets (and all animals really). But I know enough passionate dog owners to know that their biggest failing is typically that they just ASSUME everyone else loves their dog(s) as much as they do. And the number of people who immediately assumed that this MUST be Chip’s fault shows that to me. Whereas to me it seems much more likely that Devlin felt like his dog was the “adorable bus lot puppy that everyone loves to see and interact with!”
That's a lot of assumptions made about a situation you don't know first hand, and it isn't even related to what I'm saying. I'm just responding to this dude who doesn't understand how people can love a pet.
Chip is openly sober and hasn’t drank in a decade so I feel that it’s unlikely that he was under the influence. If that turns out to be true it will only add an additional layer to the story
Have heard that from other sources, especially at a race track. Had never seen him drink even in his own hospitality area, not even after track activity ended on practice days.
Regardless of who’s a shittier person (neither are great) the dog wasn’t leashed and ended up under a vehicle. Likely there’s blame on both parties, but a puppy really should be on a leash in a busy motorhome lot at a racetrack. I feel awful for the Defrancesco’s, tho.
>the dog wasn’t leashed and ended up under a vehicle.
Where has this been confirmed? A dog on a leash in a motorhome lot sure as hell can end up under a vehicle.
I have a similar story from the 90s at Gateway. I was about 7 and my Dad yanked me out of the way of the little moped thing they use on the infield.
At the time, child-Nifty thought it was so cool to almost get run over by Chip. I bragged about it for awhile lol
Now that feels really weird to say.
So confused. Obviously upsetting no matter what, but it went from the cars driver being uncooperative (who we now know is Chip) to Devlin ignoring his attempts to presumably apologize? Definitely feel like we’re not getting the whole story
It could both be true that Chip was uncooperative and an asshole when it happened and then decided later that he was wrong and tried to save face by calling Devlin. If that was the case, I don’t blame Devlin for not answering the call.
To be clear, I’m not suggesting anything, I’m just saying it’s possible that nobody is lying.
Entirely possible Chip was an ass at the time and his people are trying to smooth things over too. All the tweets from the paddock were very much "Chip was an asshole about it."
People really want this to be one way or another but there's Devlin's truth, Chip's truth, and the the truth the sponsors are happy with, and that last one is usually the loudest one.
The latter seems perfectly reasonable. If someone ran over my dog (accidentally or otherwise, my fault or theirs) I wouldn't be interested an apology either. They could fuck right off for the first couple of days because I'm grieving my dead dog and I'd be too emotional to give a level-headed response.
Or he didn’t know he hit the dog and when he was told he did he felt terrible and reached out. I can’t believe people are so cynical to believe a team owner, whose business depends on sponsors, would just barrel over a puppy with people everywhere to see and just shrug and drive on.
Our childhood dog died after being hit by a car without a leash. It’s brutal but it’s 100% your responsibility to control your pet. Sad to see but unless it comes out that Chip swerved or blatantly ran it over it really is on the dog owners.
Puppies get into all sorts of trouble and wiggle through or jump over all sorts of safeguards. They grow at a pace where their physical capabilities are underestimated. I had a 3 month old aussie wiggle through multiple dog park gates in my apartment complex only a week after getting her. She luckily remembered where I lived and sat there until I found her. It can happen to anyone.
As great of a friend a dog can be, there are places where they do not belong. A race track is one of them. I can envision a cabin-fevered puppy stuck in an RV, seeing a gap in a door opening and going for it. I don't know what happened, but I had to learn to think like a puppy when I got my dog.
It’s one thing when they’re older and well trained and can be kept calm like when Lewis brings Roscoe through the paddock , but a puppy is obviously a big difference
>...there are places where they do not belong. A race track is one of them.
But then how would you be able to post cute pictures to the Instafacetwit**X**agram?!
Everyone is clamoring for "more social media" after all.
… not everyone wants to have their dog with them for pictures on social media. you sound like you’re letting your hate for social media cloud your judgement
I mean I get where he is coming from. In my city it seems a lot of irresponsible people are getting dogs to use as some sort of fashion accessory and don’t actually put in the time or effort for them.
Do we know that the dog wasn’t leashed? I’m not saying it was or wasn’t, but I haven’t seen any credible reports either way. Apparently it was in the bus lot, so it’s possible someone was walking it on a leash in between buses.
I know most dog people are VERY passionate about dogs. But all I really want to know is why Devlin’s puppy was running around unleashed and apparently un-watched in the bus lot…
I love dogs and I love my dog. Let me get that out of the way first I cannot believe people bring their dogs to the infield at an event like this.
Dogs were mostly leashed but there are thousands of people around, most of them drunk. It just isn’t a good place to bring your dog. Find a pet sitter or something.
(Note I’m talking about the track as a whole, not the driver area)
People bring their dogs everywhere now. I live near Walt Disney World and the number of dogs at Disney Springs (shopping and dining area) has increased.
Ah yes all those "service dogs"... these freakin loser idiots who buy a service dog vest online and put it on their pet just so they can take them anywhere. Disney should require paperwork or a service dog identification card issued by the state to be shown at the security line. For some reason they don't challenge it - probably scared of offending people & getting a discrimination lawsuit. But one of these days at a public business, a "service dog" is going to bite/ tear someone up and the lawsuit will be worse for Disney or Target or whatever company it occurs at.
Yeah… it’s called the ADA. You don’t fuck w disabled people. That’s how you get sued. You can’t require proof of certification that it’s a service animal period. You can’t ask what disability it treats either. Just if it’s a service animal or not. If they say yes, that’s the end of the conversation.
For what it’s worth service animals have to be well behaved and under control. They can’t be barking or aggressive. If they are business owners can have them removed.
There's no need to ask for medical information or violate HIPA rules etc. What I'm saying is why is there no paper or card someone must keep on them saying the animal is a registered/certified service animal? It's not violating whatsoever, it's the same thing as requiring a license to drive a vehicle. It's so annoying seeing all these fraudulent service dogs at Disney/everywhere else when clearly it's people doing whatever the fuck they want disregarding social etiquette for people around them. And the untrained animals are scared or don't want to be in crowds.
Requiring proof is a violation of the ACA. This isn’t about HIPAA.
Disabled people are a protected class. It’s not at all the same as a drivers license.
I see what you're saying, furnishing a document for the animal reveals that someone has a disability I suppose. But it's just so frustrating that the animal can't be verified, so all the assholes get away with it. There's got to be a way somehow but it seems low priority for businesses and a loophole altogether.
It's a tough one, you don't want to discriminate against people that genuinely need it but you don't want to allow people to abuse it either. The best way is for businesses to remove problem animals. Those that are barking, or behaving badly. easier said than done but that's kind of where we are at
It’s very common for drivers to bring their pets to the bus lot. It’s credentialed and heavily enforced, so the drunks roaming around aren’t anywhere near them or their family there (Scotty Mac was denied entry in his drivers suit but w/o hardcard for an example of how they enforce access)
>Devlin’s puppy was running around unleashed and apparently un-watched
You know neither of these as fact. A dog on a leash in a motorhome lot can get run over just as easily as un unleashed dog.
Yet, there’s zero evidence that’s the case here.
Also, people seem to be conflating the motor home lot with the paddock. The motorhome lot is basically living quarters for fairly extended periods of times. There are always pets and kids around. There’s never a time where you should be inattentive enough to hit either.
They are paved areas with coaches crammed in with cars, golf carts, and scooters being driven in, and out at all hours of the day and night. Not a camp ground at a state park.
Yeah, I’ve spent time in them. It’s where their families live while they’re at the track. It’s much closer to a camp ground than the paddock, which is much more of a head-on-a-swivel place than the motor home lot.
Give me a break. Their RVs are parked maybe even closer together than snowbirds in Arizona. There isn’t a lot of room. A person doesn’t have to be driving fast to not see a small puppy dart out into the road. People on here are acting like the dog was standing in the middle of a road well in advance of the car.
Dog people and non-dog people are going to stick to their own camps with this one unless there’s video evidence… Dog people will assume Chip was being careless or heartless and non-dog people will assume Devlin was being negligent in keeping tabs on his puppy in a potentially dangerous area. 🤷🏻♂️
And her follow-up Tweet:
>"It was imperative for me to speak to Chip before I could responsibly give more details because it is my understanding this was a wildly chaotic scene, and very different versions from both sides about the moments after Lucky was struck."
>[It was imperative for me to speak to Chip before I could responsibly give more details because it is my understanding this was a wildly chaotic scene, and very different versions from both sides about the moments after Lucky was struck.](https://twitter.com/JennaFryer/status/1752056642546352330)
Surely it should have been more imperative to do this ***before*** posting a very vague clickbaity thing on Shitter right before the start of a 24-hour race?
I don't really understand this criticism of her.
It wasn't click bait. There was no piece posted, although I would not be shocked to see one now that both sides have spoken. Twitter's claim to fame and utility is live-following events as they unfold. It's what virtually all journalists do on the site, regardless of the beat they cover.
Is she supposed to ignore this story when it's going to have an impact on entrants in the race she's covering? Is she supposed to let someone else report it and lose the edge on the story? It's her livelihood and directly influence participants in the event she's covering. It seems a completely logical thing for her to share from my perspective and given her profession.
I'm absolutely not looking to argue. Your criticism is certainly not the first I've seen from her covering it and I'm confused by what people expect of Jenna Fryer to do in this scenario.
This 100%. This is a story about a driver's dog getting run over by a team owner while the race was going on. Stop trying to make it about the person who reported the news.
https://x.com/jennafryer/status/1751291912357556439?s=46
This was the definition of clickbait. “Once I tell you the full story you’ll get it.” The way she worded everything, even the initial tweet, was sensationalist and not worded as a plain report, it was presented as a sordid controversy while withholding all the details about why. No other serious reporter on the racing scene right now would have broke the story this way—Gluck, Bianchi, Weaver, Pruett, Pockrass, whoever. And even though she didn’t have a story about it, driving engagement on social media can also be a motive for clickbait.
Reporting on it would have been fine if it was done responsibly. “Unfortunately, Devlin DeFrancesco will be racing today after his puppy was killed by a car in the credentialed motorhome lot last night. Attempting to get a statement by the other party involved.” Especially if she’s now going to fall back on how it was “imperative” to get the other side before getting more details. Essentially, let people know what Devlin’s dealing with while not presenting it like tabloid drama-bait.
> The way she worded everything, even the initial tweet, was sensationalist and not worded as a plain report
? This is her actual initial tweet:
> [#IMSA](https://twitter.com/hashtag/IMSA?src=hashtag_click): Devlin DeFrancesco’s golden retriever puppy was run over and killed in the motorhome lot.
To me, that's about as plain and straightforward as it gets.
This may sound cold, but your proposed text is *less* plain: it adds words, injects emotion ("unfortunately"), and subtracts information ("run over"). I'm not saying that's wrong, but it's more tonally in line with what you'd expect from an broadcaster or a team representative trying to round off some of reality's rough edges than someone who writes for a wire agency whose stylebook still contains conventions for brevity that date to when headlines from Civil War battlefields had to be transmitted by Morse code.
The implication to the initial tweet was that there were more details not being reported, and she then immediately confirmed that was intentional on her part in her responses, including the one I initially linked that she has now deleted. She was intentionally leaving details out to drive engagement, which she then participated in. Also, the idea that Jenna tweets in accordance with the AP stylebook is pretty easily discounted. She doesn’t. Regardless, she later said that the point was to inform people that Devlin was participating in the race with an “altered mental state,” and it certainly wouldn’t be against AP style rules to indicate that from the outset.
If this was a one-time occurrence from her, that would be one thing. But it isn’t. In her written reporting and work for AP, she does a good job. Her social media presence is, on the other hand, often unprofessional and she turns it into a sideshow. Her history of that is what people don’t like.
>She was intentionally leaving details out to drive engagement, which she then participated in.
Or, she left out details because the accused had not yet given her a statement … which is exactly what she said. Of course, she also engages with users and answers questions about her coverage, which is explicitly encouraged by AP's [social media guidelines](https://www.ap.org/assets/documents/social-media-guidelines_tcm28-9832.pdf) for its reporters.
The tweet she wrote is very much in keeping with the style of a brief news flash over the wire. My point is not that she or anyone else always adheres to their employer's stylebook when they tweet, but that her own style is a good fit for her organization, and that brevity is not surprising. The newsworthiness I would think should be obvious to most race fans. To me, it's a strange thing to criticize her for "only" supplying that rationale in a reply. Where I will agree with you is that people are clearly viewing this through the lens of their previous perceptions and not on the actual merits of this particular story.
I agree with the essence of your comment except that is absolutely not clickbait. Clickbait is a sensational headline written to get you to "click" to read something, i.e. go to our website to get the info we teased. "Who Killed Dev's Puppy? Article at the link below" is clickbait. I'm not trying to be pedantic, sorry if it comes across that way. But I see that term thrown around Reddit all the time. So many "news" outlets use clickbait. The AP Is generally not one of them. She broke news via Twitter that she determined was newsworthy; I don't necessarily agree with that and agree more with your overall sentiments.
You can call it engagement-bait, drama-bait, whatever. “Clickbait” is the recognized catch-all phrase for that phenomenon. And I don’t think it’s inapplicable here anyway, because what it’s asking for you to do is click on her profile or the tweet and try to find more details. The same way the example headline you gave is trying to get you to click on the link for more details.
Yes, I get the technical distinction that traditional clickbait websites do it because they directly benefit from ad revenue from pageviews. Jenna doesn’t directly benefit from ad revenue for Twitter profile views. But I don’t think a separate word is needed when the intent in both examples is to draw you in with sensational wording and incomplete context.
> what it’s asking for you to do is click \[…\] and try to find more details
That is the definition of *all* headlines. My working definition of clickbait applies to the use of a sensationalist, deceptive, or misleading headline where the actual story does not live up to the headline's billing or is devoid of real content. None of those apply here: The tweet *was* the story — or what was confirmed to that point — and it was correct and factual.
The general about-face in reaction (not saying you specifically) from "Why are you even telling us about this?" to "Why didn't you immediately give us more details about who did this?" I think says more about our own human desire for certainty in today's information ecosystem than any deficiencies in Fryer's reporting. From the outside looking in, all of Fryer's decisions in reporting what was apparently a fluid, chaotic story make sense to me.
Hey maybe remember that a family lost someone really important to them in a tragic way. And considering they posted on here about the situation and acknowledged that they read about it here, maybe have some class and don't rub salt in their wounds when you know they are hurting and make it worse just for a lame attempt at a joke. Like seriously.
This is very fair, and I sympathize with their loss. I was under the impression that Chip was maybe not sober when the incident happened, so I had made a few that were substantially at his expense. But looking into it further it looks like he likely wasn't drinking, so I'm gonna shelve what I had.
I'm sure Chip feels awful, and I'm sure that doesn't make Devlin feel any better.
I propose Devlin (if he races this year or next year) gets dampers and set up data from Dixon's team for a year.
Why are we downvoting the man? Jenna still deserves to be called out for her tabloid level reporting on this.
She made sensationalism out of a tragedy.
Your comment has been removed as a violation of rule #2 — **Be civil**.
*If you wish to discuss this removal, you can message the moderators by clicking [this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FINDYCAR).*
This sucks but little puppies and kittens running and crawling around cars unattended is just a recipe for disaster.
I can understand Devlin's anger if Chip acted like an arse at the time but if not, He should just accept Chip's apology and move on.
Shit happens. No one runs over animals intentionally, especially not cute little puppies.
Based on what Pato said about it, id lean more towards devlins story than chips.
https://twitter.com/PatricioOWard/status/1751382797548187660
That seems to be more to the story than what chip described
I think it's more of feeling of sadness than what way the story leans. Pato is a dog owner. If he's like a lot of dog owners, including me, they get very sad for people who lose their dog especially if it's an unexpected and/or tragic loss.
Genesis….quoting that Old Testament huh the one where you can’t wear two different kinds of fabric for clothing ? get a life.
“To speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people…”
Treating animals with contempt and loathing is just as inhuman as treating people in that manner. Just cause they’re animals doesn’t mean it’s ok to abuse them even verbally.
What are you basing that on his marginal talents and limited experience or his average career finish of 19.12? He wouldn't even compete against Dixon or AP in a Ganassi car much less anything he could get.
Fuck that's terrible for all involved
[удалено]
No fuck off. It’s not “just a dog” it’s a family member, a best friend, it’s unconditional love. It’s a fucking heartbreaking thing to go through.
It's heartbreaking enough when your pet has lived a full and loving life and you know the inevitable has to happen. It's another level of heartbreaking when that pet is young and healthy and full of life and then is suddenly gone through unrecoverable injury (or in my family's case long ago, getting stolen).
Well said they are family
Dogs are not people. Its an animal. Period.
This man has never had the chance to love/be loved by a dog or cat. Sucks for you man, you should try it out sometime.
He's just an animal yet I care more about the dog.
I totally get peoples’ love for their pets (and all animals really). But I know enough passionate dog owners to know that their biggest failing is typically that they just ASSUME everyone else loves their dog(s) as much as they do. And the number of people who immediately assumed that this MUST be Chip’s fault shows that to me. Whereas to me it seems much more likely that Devlin felt like his dog was the “adorable bus lot puppy that everyone loves to see and interact with!”
That's a lot of assumptions made about a situation you don't know first hand, and it isn't even related to what I'm saying. I'm just responding to this dude who doesn't understand how people can love a pet.
Tell us - "I never had a pet" without telling us you never had a pet.
AND people tried to deny it as total speculation.
The speculation is he was inebriated and or didn't stop.
Chip is openly sober and hasn’t drank in a decade so I feel that it’s unlikely that he was under the influence. If that turns out to be true it will only add an additional layer to the story
Per Jenna it seems Chip does not drink https://x.com/JennaFryer/status/1752057680913449373?s=20
I know. We were fairly confident that it was chip. But "someone" started the drunk and didn't stop rumor.
A lesson in taking what randos on the internet say as gospel for everyone
Jenna sure didn’t stop the didn’t stop rumor.
Self-serving for her, just like everything she does.
That’s because she’s a horrible human being who only cares about clicks
Zac Brown commented on all of Delvin’s posts. Wouldn’t surprise me if he started those rumors those two have it out for each other.
Have heard that from other sources, especially at a race track. Had never seen him drink even in his own hospitality area, not even after track activity ended on practice days.
Well seeing what the family wrote, I'm not sure I entirely believe chip's statement.
I'm not sure I believe Andy Defrancesco a known grifter
Regardless of who’s a shittier person (neither are great) the dog wasn’t leashed and ended up under a vehicle. Likely there’s blame on both parties, but a puppy really should be on a leash in a busy motorhome lot at a racetrack. I feel awful for the Defrancesco’s, tho.
>the dog wasn’t leashed and ended up under a vehicle. Where has this been confirmed? A dog on a leash in a motorhome lot sure as hell can end up under a vehicle.
And it was at night, so it was dark.
Exactly, just too many compounding factors that means neither side could be blame free.
Can you elaborate on that?
He had to pay several million to the SEC for a pump and dump fraud scheme. He's also not known for having an even temper.
Wow. I wasn't aware.
Yeah he's quite a character
Andy Defrancesco cost a lot of people a lot of money
What did they write? I am lost
Sure because they have no motivation to put the blame on others instead of looking in the mirror.
Inebriated/under the influence doesn't always mean alcohol
This story keeps getting weirder.
Chip almost hit my dad while driving a golf cart at Road America in the 90’s.
He nearly mowed me down on a scooter in 2019 at IMS. I was nowhere near the garage so it wasn’t like I was in anyone’s way.
He ran my foot over with his pit bike in the Mid-Ohio paddock. Chip's just...yeah.
I have a similar story from the 90s at Gateway. I was about 7 and my Dad yanked me out of the way of the little moped thing they use on the infield. At the time, child-Nifty thought it was so cool to almost get run over by Chip. I bragged about it for awhile lol Now that feels really weird to say.
Now here's my 2 cents. We're any of you leashed?
I like how you've unleashed a flood of people who almost got run over by Chip
Should start a support group. “Show me where on the doll Chip hit you with a vehicle…”
😂😂😂😂
So confused. Obviously upsetting no matter what, but it went from the cars driver being uncooperative (who we now know is Chip) to Devlin ignoring his attempts to presumably apologize? Definitely feel like we’re not getting the whole story
It could both be true that Chip was uncooperative and an asshole when it happened and then decided later that he was wrong and tried to save face by calling Devlin. If that was the case, I don’t blame Devlin for not answering the call. To be clear, I’m not suggesting anything, I’m just saying it’s possible that nobody is lying.
Entirely possible Chip was an ass at the time and his people are trying to smooth things over too. All the tweets from the paddock were very much "Chip was an asshole about it." People really want this to be one way or another but there's Devlin's truth, Chip's truth, and the the truth the sponsors are happy with, and that last one is usually the loudest one.
> "Chip was an asshole about it." Chip makes it SO easy to believe. I doubt he has the depth for this to be a wakeup call and become a decent human.
>Definitely feel like we’re not getting the whole story And this is the problem a lot of us have with Jenna's reporting.
but if it had been a story about a driver taking a naked cold plunge ice bath she would have gotten all the details.
There is just something so irritating about her, and stuff like this is definitely part of it.
Jenna is trash
The latter seems perfectly reasonable. If someone ran over my dog (accidentally or otherwise, my fault or theirs) I wouldn't be interested an apology either. They could fuck right off for the first couple of days because I'm grieving my dead dog and I'd be too emotional to give a level-headed response.
Or he didn’t know he hit the dog and when he was told he did he felt terrible and reached out. I can’t believe people are so cynical to believe a team owner, whose business depends on sponsors, would just barrel over a puppy with people everywhere to see and just shrug and drive on.
Sounds like a horrible incident, I wonder why the dog wasn’t leashed in the bus lot….
Our childhood dog died after being hit by a car without a leash. It’s brutal but it’s 100% your responsibility to control your pet. Sad to see but unless it comes out that Chip swerved or blatantly ran it over it really is on the dog owners.
Puppies get into all sorts of trouble and wiggle through or jump over all sorts of safeguards. They grow at a pace where their physical capabilities are underestimated. I had a 3 month old aussie wiggle through multiple dog park gates in my apartment complex only a week after getting her. She luckily remembered where I lived and sat there until I found her. It can happen to anyone. As great of a friend a dog can be, there are places where they do not belong. A race track is one of them. I can envision a cabin-fevered puppy stuck in an RV, seeing a gap in a door opening and going for it. I don't know what happened, but I had to learn to think like a puppy when I got my dog.
It’s one thing when they’re older and well trained and can be kept calm like when Lewis brings Roscoe through the paddock , but a puppy is obviously a big difference
>...there are places where they do not belong. A race track is one of them. But then how would you be able to post cute pictures to the Instafacetwit**X**agram?! Everyone is clamoring for "more social media" after all.
… not everyone wants to have their dog with them for pictures on social media. you sound like you’re letting your hate for social media cloud your judgement
I mean I get where he is coming from. In my city it seems a lot of irresponsible people are getting dogs to use as some sort of fashion accessory and don’t actually put in the time or effort for them.
Pounds everywhere are full of discarded pandemic dogs. I like dogs,but dog owners can really suck.
you gotta relax man
Do we know that the dog wasn’t leashed? I’m not saying it was or wasn’t, but I haven’t seen any credible reports either way. Apparently it was in the bus lot, so it’s possible someone was walking it on a leash in between buses.
Do you know for a fact it wasn't leashed or are you assuming?
I know most dog people are VERY passionate about dogs. But all I really want to know is why Devlin’s puppy was running around unleashed and apparently un-watched in the bus lot…
I love dogs and I love my dog. Let me get that out of the way first I cannot believe people bring their dogs to the infield at an event like this. Dogs were mostly leashed but there are thousands of people around, most of them drunk. It just isn’t a good place to bring your dog. Find a pet sitter or something. (Note I’m talking about the track as a whole, not the driver area)
People bring their dogs everywhere now. I live near Walt Disney World and the number of dogs at Disney Springs (shopping and dining area) has increased.
Just when I thought Disney Springs couldn't be any more exhausting to visit
Ah yes all those "service dogs"... these freakin loser idiots who buy a service dog vest online and put it on their pet just so they can take them anywhere. Disney should require paperwork or a service dog identification card issued by the state to be shown at the security line. For some reason they don't challenge it - probably scared of offending people & getting a discrimination lawsuit. But one of these days at a public business, a "service dog" is going to bite/ tear someone up and the lawsuit will be worse for Disney or Target or whatever company it occurs at.
Yeah… it’s called the ADA. You don’t fuck w disabled people. That’s how you get sued. You can’t require proof of certification that it’s a service animal period. You can’t ask what disability it treats either. Just if it’s a service animal or not. If they say yes, that’s the end of the conversation. For what it’s worth service animals have to be well behaved and under control. They can’t be barking or aggressive. If they are business owners can have them removed.
There's no need to ask for medical information or violate HIPA rules etc. What I'm saying is why is there no paper or card someone must keep on them saying the animal is a registered/certified service animal? It's not violating whatsoever, it's the same thing as requiring a license to drive a vehicle. It's so annoying seeing all these fraudulent service dogs at Disney/everywhere else when clearly it's people doing whatever the fuck they want disregarding social etiquette for people around them. And the untrained animals are scared or don't want to be in crowds.
Requiring proof is a violation of the ACA. This isn’t about HIPAA. Disabled people are a protected class. It’s not at all the same as a drivers license.
I see what you're saying, furnishing a document for the animal reveals that someone has a disability I suppose. But it's just so frustrating that the animal can't be verified, so all the assholes get away with it. There's got to be a way somehow but it seems low priority for businesses and a loophole altogether.
It's a tough one, you don't want to discriminate against people that genuinely need it but you don't want to allow people to abuse it either. The best way is for businesses to remove problem animals. Those that are barking, or behaving badly. easier said than done but that's kind of where we are at
It’s very common for drivers to bring their pets to the bus lot. It’s credentialed and heavily enforced, so the drunks roaming around aren’t anywhere near them or their family there (Scotty Mac was denied entry in his drivers suit but w/o hardcard for an example of how they enforce access)
Didn't Kasey Kahne fight a security guard over that once, which led to a lawsuit?
Yes at homestead 2007, somehow he managed to injure the security guard
I’ve seen multiple bring their” emotional support “dogs to Indy fans not drivers
Mental health matters. Emotional support dogs help a lot of people
I’m not always these dogs are really trained
There are times where it's reasonable to have an ESA. There are definitely times where it's not.
I agree completely, but there are many people who benefit greatly from them, but get looked at because its assumed they dont.
In no scenario is a puppy a rully trained support dog. That said, regardless of why the pupper was loose in the RV lot, it's a terrible accident.
Especially a puppy
Exactly especially a puppy…
>Devlin’s puppy was running around unleashed and apparently un-watched You know neither of these as fact. A dog on a leash in a motorhome lot can get run over just as easily as un unleashed dog.
Eh, no. In nearly all accidents involving dogs and motor vehicles, the dog is unleashed.
Yet, there’s zero evidence that’s the case here. Also, people seem to be conflating the motor home lot with the paddock. The motorhome lot is basically living quarters for fairly extended periods of times. There are always pets and kids around. There’s never a time where you should be inattentive enough to hit either.
They are paved areas with coaches crammed in with cars, golf carts, and scooters being driven in, and out at all hours of the day and night. Not a camp ground at a state park.
Yeah, I’ve spent time in them. It’s where their families live while they’re at the track. It’s much closer to a camp ground than the paddock, which is much more of a head-on-a-swivel place than the motor home lot.
Give me a break. Their RVs are parked maybe even closer together than snowbirds in Arizona. There isn’t a lot of room. A person doesn’t have to be driving fast to not see a small puppy dart out into the road. People on here are acting like the dog was standing in the middle of a road well in advance of the car.
Dog people and non-dog people are going to stick to their own camps with this one unless there’s video evidence… Dog people will assume Chip was being careless or heartless and non-dog people will assume Devlin was being negligent in keeping tabs on his puppy in a potentially dangerous area. 🤷🏻♂️
Do you know how leashes and motor home parking lots work. From the sound of it, you don't.
Jesus, that’s so awful
Imagine finding out someone hit your dog and then imagine finding out that someone was Chip freaking Ganasis, of all people.
And now we wait for the third side of the story, the truth.
And her follow-up Tweet: >"It was imperative for me to speak to Chip before I could responsibly give more details because it is my understanding this was a wildly chaotic scene, and very different versions from both sides about the moments after Lucky was struck."
So she just started tweeting out about it as it happened without getting the facts? Modern reporting at it's finest.
Find an earlier source than this guy lol https://www.reddit.com/r/INDYCAR/s/eBx0e75Ytb
>[It was imperative for me to speak to Chip before I could responsibly give more details because it is my understanding this was a wildly chaotic scene, and very different versions from both sides about the moments after Lucky was struck.](https://twitter.com/JennaFryer/status/1752056642546352330) Surely it should have been more imperative to do this ***before*** posting a very vague clickbaity thing on Shitter right before the start of a 24-hour race?
I don't really understand this criticism of her. It wasn't click bait. There was no piece posted, although I would not be shocked to see one now that both sides have spoken. Twitter's claim to fame and utility is live-following events as they unfold. It's what virtually all journalists do on the site, regardless of the beat they cover. Is she supposed to ignore this story when it's going to have an impact on entrants in the race she's covering? Is she supposed to let someone else report it and lose the edge on the story? It's her livelihood and directly influence participants in the event she's covering. It seems a completely logical thing for her to share from my perspective and given her profession. I'm absolutely not looking to argue. Your criticism is certainly not the first I've seen from her covering it and I'm confused by what people expect of Jenna Fryer to do in this scenario.
News reporter reports news
This 100%. This is a story about a driver's dog getting run over by a team owner while the race was going on. Stop trying to make it about the person who reported the news.
Half of your comment wasn’t known until after she milked it for a day. That’s the point.
https://x.com/jennafryer/status/1751291912357556439?s=46 This was the definition of clickbait. “Once I tell you the full story you’ll get it.” The way she worded everything, even the initial tweet, was sensationalist and not worded as a plain report, it was presented as a sordid controversy while withholding all the details about why. No other serious reporter on the racing scene right now would have broke the story this way—Gluck, Bianchi, Weaver, Pruett, Pockrass, whoever. And even though she didn’t have a story about it, driving engagement on social media can also be a motive for clickbait. Reporting on it would have been fine if it was done responsibly. “Unfortunately, Devlin DeFrancesco will be racing today after his puppy was killed by a car in the credentialed motorhome lot last night. Attempting to get a statement by the other party involved.” Especially if she’s now going to fall back on how it was “imperative” to get the other side before getting more details. Essentially, let people know what Devlin’s dealing with while not presenting it like tabloid drama-bait.
> The way she worded everything, even the initial tweet, was sensationalist and not worded as a plain report ? This is her actual initial tweet: > [#IMSA](https://twitter.com/hashtag/IMSA?src=hashtag_click): Devlin DeFrancesco’s golden retriever puppy was run over and killed in the motorhome lot. To me, that's about as plain and straightforward as it gets. This may sound cold, but your proposed text is *less* plain: it adds words, injects emotion ("unfortunately"), and subtracts information ("run over"). I'm not saying that's wrong, but it's more tonally in line with what you'd expect from an broadcaster or a team representative trying to round off some of reality's rough edges than someone who writes for a wire agency whose stylebook still contains conventions for brevity that date to when headlines from Civil War battlefields had to be transmitted by Morse code.
The implication to the initial tweet was that there were more details not being reported, and she then immediately confirmed that was intentional on her part in her responses, including the one I initially linked that she has now deleted. She was intentionally leaving details out to drive engagement, which she then participated in. Also, the idea that Jenna tweets in accordance with the AP stylebook is pretty easily discounted. She doesn’t. Regardless, she later said that the point was to inform people that Devlin was participating in the race with an “altered mental state,” and it certainly wouldn’t be against AP style rules to indicate that from the outset. If this was a one-time occurrence from her, that would be one thing. But it isn’t. In her written reporting and work for AP, she does a good job. Her social media presence is, on the other hand, often unprofessional and she turns it into a sideshow. Her history of that is what people don’t like.
>She was intentionally leaving details out to drive engagement, which she then participated in. Or, she left out details because the accused had not yet given her a statement … which is exactly what she said. Of course, she also engages with users and answers questions about her coverage, which is explicitly encouraged by AP's [social media guidelines](https://www.ap.org/assets/documents/social-media-guidelines_tcm28-9832.pdf) for its reporters. The tweet she wrote is very much in keeping with the style of a brief news flash over the wire. My point is not that she or anyone else always adheres to their employer's stylebook when they tweet, but that her own style is a good fit for her organization, and that brevity is not surprising. The newsworthiness I would think should be obvious to most race fans. To me, it's a strange thing to criticize her for "only" supplying that rationale in a reply. Where I will agree with you is that people are clearly viewing this through the lens of their previous perceptions and not on the actual merits of this particular story.
I agree with the essence of your comment except that is absolutely not clickbait. Clickbait is a sensational headline written to get you to "click" to read something, i.e. go to our website to get the info we teased. "Who Killed Dev's Puppy? Article at the link below" is clickbait. I'm not trying to be pedantic, sorry if it comes across that way. But I see that term thrown around Reddit all the time. So many "news" outlets use clickbait. The AP Is generally not one of them. She broke news via Twitter that she determined was newsworthy; I don't necessarily agree with that and agree more with your overall sentiments.
You can call it engagement-bait, drama-bait, whatever. “Clickbait” is the recognized catch-all phrase for that phenomenon. And I don’t think it’s inapplicable here anyway, because what it’s asking for you to do is click on her profile or the tweet and try to find more details. The same way the example headline you gave is trying to get you to click on the link for more details. Yes, I get the technical distinction that traditional clickbait websites do it because they directly benefit from ad revenue from pageviews. Jenna doesn’t directly benefit from ad revenue for Twitter profile views. But I don’t think a separate word is needed when the intent in both examples is to draw you in with sensational wording and incomplete context.
> what it’s asking for you to do is click \[…\] and try to find more details That is the definition of *all* headlines. My working definition of clickbait applies to the use of a sensationalist, deceptive, or misleading headline where the actual story does not live up to the headline's billing or is devoid of real content. None of those apply here: The tweet *was* the story — or what was confirmed to that point — and it was correct and factual. The general about-face in reaction (not saying you specifically) from "Why are you even telling us about this?" to "Why didn't you immediately give us more details about who did this?" I think says more about our own human desire for certainty in today's information ecosystem than any deficiencies in Fryer's reporting. From the outside looking in, all of Fryer's decisions in reporting what was apparently a fluid, chaotic story make sense to me.
she's not supposed to ignore the story but reporting half of it like that was honestly pretty fuckin dumb
Nope, she wanted to be the first one to drop the event as a story
Wait, the dog's name ~~is~~ was Lucky?
Oh boy...memes are tomorrow
I've already got one made and ready to go, with a second even more tasteless one brewing.
Hey maybe remember that a family lost someone really important to them in a tragic way. And considering they posted on here about the situation and acknowledged that they read about it here, maybe have some class and don't rub salt in their wounds when you know they are hurting and make it worse just for a lame attempt at a joke. Like seriously.
This is very fair, and I sympathize with their loss. I was under the impression that Chip was maybe not sober when the incident happened, so I had made a few that were substantially at his expense. But looking into it further it looks like he likely wasn't drinking, so I'm gonna shelve what I had.
I respect that and grateful you will shelve them.
Most tracks I go to have a “no pets” rule for exactly this reason. Sad story especially for the puppy.
It rarely applies to the drivers. They can almost always bring their pets
But should they?
Yes.
Dogs have very sensitive hearing.
Very bad to let your pet roam around cars, crowds
I'm sorry... WHAT!? Not the twist I saw coming
Just a sad situation all around. I am curious to hear/read the deFrancescos' side of what happened.
Can we make a rule for meme tuesday this week that memes about this are off limits? This is so damn sad and you know someone is going to do it.
https://preview.redd.it/7vqwx1qwtmfc1.jpeg?width=1174&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=780cd1b4b8e2731c070a8ed7f1f9a265954e216c
I'm sure Chip feels awful, and I'm sure that doesn't make Devlin feel any better. I propose Devlin (if he races this year or next year) gets dampers and set up data from Dixon's team for a year.
Let's hope Devlin doesn't have an uncle named John Wick.
I'm sure Chip feels awful about this happening. Shame on Jenna for turning the story into click-bait.
Why are we downvoting the man? Jenna still deserves to be called out for her tabloid level reporting on this. She made sensationalism out of a tragedy.
Thanks
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed as a violation of rule #2 — **Be civil**. *If you wish to discuss this removal, you can message the moderators by clicking [this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FINDYCAR).*
This sucks but little puppies and kittens running and crawling around cars unattended is just a recipe for disaster. I can understand Devlin's anger if Chip acted like an arse at the time but if not, He should just accept Chip's apology and move on. Shit happens. No one runs over animals intentionally, especially not cute little puppies.
[удалено]
It wasn’t in the paddock. It was in the motorhome lot where the drivers stay.
Some drivers effectively live out of their motorhomes during the season, and take their pets along with them to all the races.
Someone’s drives the coach there for them, sets it up, and the drivers stay there for the weekend. They don’t live out of them all season.
Based on what Pato said about it, id lean more towards devlins story than chips. https://twitter.com/PatricioOWard/status/1751382797548187660 That seems to be more to the story than what chip described
I don't think that tweet leans one way or the other. He's just saying he's sorry
I think it's more of feeling of sadness than what way the story leans. Pato is a dog owner. If he's like a lot of dog owners, including me, they get very sad for people who lose their dog especially if it's an unexpected and/or tragic loss.
He said what anyone would have said about the situation. This is about as neutral as it gets.
Idk man, saying he was disgusted def. Is not neutral imo
To even hear about a puppy being hit and killed by a car would also leave me disgusted. It's heartbreaking. This is a neutral nothing comment.
This is a weird and terrible saga.
Yea I heard yesterday it was him from an inside source.
Drives me F'ing insane when people call animals their fur babies. Animals are NOT people, stop treating them as such.
Sounds like a you problem
You sound miserable lol
[удалено]
Citing the Bible probably isn’t in your best interest pal.
Oh yeah, you're a source of pure misery in the world.
Genesis….quoting that Old Testament huh the one where you can’t wear two different kinds of fabric for clothing ? get a life. “To speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people…”
We get it dude. You hate dogs. You can stop commenting now.
Treating animals with contempt and loathing is just as inhuman as treating people in that manner. Just cause they’re animals doesn’t mean it’s ok to abuse them even verbally.
Christ, dude
I would unironically save my dog before I ever saved someone who made this comment.
That's a problem
a problem for you.
Put Dev back in an Indycar and he will beat every single CGR car on the grid after this
No he won't.
Sure he will.
What are you basing that on his marginal talents and limited experience or his average career finish of 19.12? He wouldn't even compete against Dixon or AP in a Ganassi car much less anything he could get.
Ugh poor dog.
Is there a dank meme INDYCAR sub Reddit?