FIA looking into motor racing media's issues

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
  • #357748

    Yesterday the FIA announced the formation of a new working group looking into “issues facing accredited media across its major championships”:

    The intention of the new working group is to lead to the enhancement of media coverage of top-level motor sport championships through the consultation and collaboration of the media involved in the sport.

    What – if any – concerns do you have about the state of motor racing media at present? How do you think it could be improved? What would you like to see more or less of? For obvious reasons this is something I’m keen to get your views on!


    I think that quite a lot of the media associated with F1 are so desperate for clicks that they try to stir up controversy. It’s as if they don’t see the people involved in the sport as real human beings. I’d like to see a professional code of conduct introduced, with accreditation for journalists who adhere to it. That way we, as fans, can weed out the shock-jocks and we can reward responsible journalism. And we wouldn’t have to waste our own valuable time trying to work out if the story really is big/important, or if it’s been bigged-up to cause trouble.

    I, as a fan, would like to be able to report irresponsible journalism to a named body in F1. I’d like to stop the bullies and trolls who have official media roles in F1, because they make the sport ugly and bring it into disrepute.

    And, obviously, I’d like F1 to be free-to-air. And I’d like Sky to lose their broadcasting rights, simply because I prefer C4’s offering.

    I don’t need any fancy bells and whistles while watching on-track action, or more fan interaction. I’m perfectly satisfied with the current F1 app (although I’d welcome more in-race technical data) and I’m happy with just one view of the race – I really don’t need to watch it from different angles or in different ways. I don’t need games, I don’t need gimmicks like driver boost (or whatever it’s called in Formula E), and I don’t like having to vote for driver of the day before the race is even finished – in fact I don’t like the vote at all because it rarely reflects the real skill of the drivers.

    Despite having driver numbers on the cars it’s still not clear enough which driver is which, as proven by the commentators who still get it wrong. We absolutely need to know who’s driving the car we’re watching!!

    I’d like some TV coverage of pre-season testing (the cars on track, not just a studio analysis). I know some (yes, Ferrari, I’m talking about you) like their cars to be secret, but having attended several tests I really can’t see what they’re able to hide from other teams, or indeed from anyone able to look down into their garage from the stands above.

    And I’d like some off-season free-to-air programming. I’m not going to buy a NOWTV pass to watch Sky during the off-season, but I’d like something to watch between November and March. I think F1 as a ruling body rely too much on the teams to provide entertainment via social media, and could be doing more themselves.

    I’m sure I’ll think of more, but that’s it for now.


    Agreed, with everything you said, nothing to add, couldn’t put it any better @f1antics

    A reflection on the problem you pointed out, the “desperation for clicks” and it’s relation to free-to-air F1, or lack thereof.
    It’s not just that sky can be fanatical and bias but simply theatrical, artificial. SSF1 often even forgets their job of commentating the race, they rather go on talking about what they want, football pundits are a lot like that these days but, in football you pretty much see everything going on, on screen.
    SKY SF1 must and obviously do feel a tremendous pressure to deliver good ratings, their job depends on it, to entertain. For their sake they entertain, it’s not their job to entertain, it’s f1’s. Sky sports f1 unfortunately does away with the respectable journalist values that are a must for some of us. SSF1 does whatever they see fit, Lazenby even call their pieces “stories”. Besides the bias and the nationalist approach, the latter I can certainly excuse, they mock, deride, disregard, bully, lie etc… They can be funny, in an inappropriate way. Don’t call it banter, banter is not mocking.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.