Horses killed at the "Grand National."

BBC UNDER ATTACK OVER FOUR GRAND NATIONAL DEATHS

This item seems interesting in that it may help us think through our attitudes to single issue campaigning (SIC). Is this an example of a SIC?

I have followed Animal Aid's coverage of horse deaths for a few years. For me, it seems to highlight one type of nonhuman animal use that emphasises the deep speciesism that exists throughout the fabric of society, especially in relation to how speciesist media deals with such an issue [we can't spoil the "entertainment" (not to mention the gambling)].

When several thousands of nonhuman animals are killed every second for for their flesh alone, three deaths hardly register in one sense. Is it legitimate, however, to take such events in order to make wider abolitionist points about general animal use?

As I type this, I am listening to a national radio programme in Ireland. One of the morning show presenters, Ivan Yates (no relation) - http://www.newstalk.ie/presenters/ivan-yates/ - had a week off in order to attend the Aintree "Grand" National. As far as I know, he's made no comment about the horse deaths since his return. Says he had a great time in England, however. However, why should he make such a comment? - he wears leather, he eats meat, he has "animal farming" interests. Why would these three deaths even interest a person like this, provided they were not the individual horses he has a financial or "sporting" interest in?