Revamped (May 2013) 'Motor Sport' magazine

While grovelling, I should mention that in Poetry in Motion, which I have been lauding on here, the only thing that Tony didn't do himself was the excellent and very complete appendix of all his race results, which he delegated to the comprehensive historical knowledge and researches of one D. McKinney.

Not entirely true - it was based on notes taken from Tony's detailed diaries (up to 1957, from memory) and A Record of Motor Racing at Goodwood by Robert Barker (invaluable for CASB's early racing there) as well as my own records

Coming back to the magazine: I was not particularly impressed by the cartoon Achille Varzi life story. Not because of the cartoon format, which is justified by the lack of available photos, but by what appeared to be a certain lack of deep research. Without checking, as I recall, some threads on here contradict the tale as told. And some of the cars look 'a little wrong'.

I thought the concept is good-ish, though the execution pretty 'basic' in terms of info being presented. It will be interesting to see what the next two or three are like (David Purley next). And to remember that maybe some young kids read (or look at the pics in) dad's copy (or mum's??) I don't think the cartoon is specifically 'signposted' as being aimed at youngsters though, which is slightly worrying.

If I were in the editor's chair, for this 'visual element', it'd be a nice old-fashioned tech drawing or cutaway pic every month.

Having picked up the copy today, I don't really have any major complaints. I'm not sure the actual change of layouts would encourage me to buy the magazine, but neither is it such a washout that it actually puts me off buying.

[*] I agree with the point about the lack of book/DVD reviews in the book. With the hundreds of books released each year, this current format will only cover 48.

[*] I'm unsure what the "graphic" section brings. I suspect it might be the current thing after Adam Parr's book.

[*] I'm not particularly interested in the Frankel section (though I don't quite get the anamosity in this thread), but I'm sure ever sub-section of the magazine will have those that at least someone out there skips over.

I tried not to take into account the actual contents because from magazine to magazine, some "Lunches With" will interest me more than others or the particular subject matter tackled into a column will be of interest and will fluctate from edition to edition.

So, yes, I don't think anything that has changed encourages me to buy the magazine, but neither does it discourage me.

Now, if you get me talking about the way Autosport showed the GP2 results, that's a different matter!

And now I must nip out and get my copy afore the shops close.

Having looked through, I see no problem at all with the revisions inside. Different, but fine by me. And we get a nice pic of our jovial guru, Baron Nye of Farnham!

But I don't like the new cover. I know they kept the MotorSport masthead, but it now looks far less distinctive and far more like a lot of other mags, which seems like a bit of an own goal. Revert to previous cover layout please!

It will be interesting to see what the next two or three are like (David Purley next).

I really really hope it's not going to include a cartoon depiction of him trying to rescue Roger Williamson...

I really really hope it's not going to include a cartoon depiction of him trying to rescue Roger Williamson...

Or any of his leg operations...

More seriously, this cartoon idea seems a bit odd to me, just who are they aiming this at? If readers have been able to cope OK with the writings of Roebuck, Nye and Boddy etc for all these years, who has now decided that we'd cope more easily with cartoon pics and speech bubbles?

I agree with this. New cover doesn't make sense to me.

Doesn't seem different enough to make a fuss about. At least it's not red.

Just an outsider's thought on the small space given in the new MS to Book/DVD reviews. Sadly every issue of every newstand magazine has a finite number of pages, mainly dicated by the number of advertisers they're able to attract. These days, advertisers are not exactly fighting each other to buy the last available space in a particular issue - rather the reverse. So the editorial team has to juggle all the elements they'd like to include in relation to the number of pages their kind advertisers have paid for them to play with.

Something always has to give and, especially if it happens to have been a relatively quiet month for new book or DVD releases , it will be that section that shrinks, to free up space for something else that needs it. Similarly if there's a rush of interesting new book and DVD releases the following momth, I'd imagine they'd claim slightly more space, especially if the Editor hears of mutterings from the TNF Grumblesphere.

Or any of his leg operations...

More seriously, this cartoon idea seems a bit odd to me, just who are they aiming this at? If readers have been able to cope OK with the writings of Roebuck, Nye and Boddy etc for all these years, who has now decided that we'd cope more easily with cartoon pics and speech bubbles?

Well if they are receptive to new features, could I put in a plea for a "Private Ear" monthly column as penned by the late Nick Brittain and a section along the lines of "Cobra" magazine which we were told came from the dark recesses of the Brabham team, for a bit of real inside info.

One reason why I bought Top Gear Magazine instead yesterday: I immediately noticed that Motor Sport had doctored the Senna picture on the cover. He's shown to be wearing red McLaren overalls, but the photo clearly dates from his Lotus days. For a magazine with such a quality standard, that's sacrilege.

But I don't like the new cover. I know they kept the MotorSport masthead, but it now looks far less distinctive and far more like a lot of other mags, which seems like a bit of an own goal. Revert to previous cover layout please!

Exactly, after all those years they still don't get it. A green cover stands out from all the rest!

Edited by Tom V, 09 April 2013 - 13:43.

For my two penny's worth, I have read Motor Sport on and off since the 1960s: I enjoyed the modern road car stuff of the Bill Boddy era, and I've enjoyed Andrew Frankel's writings of late on the same subject - as I did his description of driving the Porsche 917 and Alfa 158.

Never mind Motor Sport magazine: one thing that has gone off is the general tone of Nostalgia Forum postings, once so informative and gentlemanly, which have drifted progressively from abrupt, through rude to (all too often) downright offensive.

Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be...

I could not agree more with your second paragraph. I am often shocked by the tone of some of the posts here. I do wish people would keep debate, and the possible disagreements that will arise, respectful and polite.

I could not agree more with your second paragraph. I am often shocked by the tone of some of the posts here. I do wish people would keep debate, and the possible disagreements that will arise, respectful and polite.

Do you really think so? I was slightly irritated by one poster on the recent Ruthless Drivers thread, but haven't noticed any dramatic deterioration elsewhere. Since the main subject under discussion there was Ayrton Senna's track manners, I suppose that was only to be expected from a Senna fan. If you think things are bad here, it's probably best if you don't go anywhere near Racing Comments or The Paddock Club.

Do you really think so? I was slightly irritated by one poster on the recent Ruthless Drivers thread, but haven't noticed any dramatic deterioration elsewhere. Since the main subject under discussion there was Ayrton Senna's track manners, I suppose that was only to be expected from a Senna fan. If you think things are bad here, it's probably best if you don't go anywhere near Racing Comments or The Paddock Club.

Yes, the agressive and rude tone taken at times here does sometimes surprise me. I regularly enjoy the technical and racing comments forums too. And encounter the same problem there.

Having grown up around and in the "motor trade" in London's East End I am not unused to coarse behaviour or language. But I do find it unpleasant and unneccesary.

I sometimes wonder whether the fact that many posting here are anonymous (including me) allows and perhaps encourages this poor behaviour. And whether those who make these posts would behave in this manner if the person they are adressing was actually in the same room.

I occasionnaly wonder whether this is a racing or football siupporters form. Perhaps I exagerate a little there.........

Yes, the agressive and rude tone taken at times here does sometimes surprise me.

Our moderator TW won't thank me for saying this, but surely the best course would be to report any contributions you don't like to him. I'd agree that standards of politeness have deteriorated a little recently, but if badly behaved posters are regularly reported to him, I'm sure he'd take whatever he considers to be appropriate action eventually, though I think he's very reluctant to go as far as banning people.

I haven't a lot of experience of other forums, but TNF seems to me to be still be for the most part one of the most polite and gentlemanly, it would be a great shame to lose that.

On posters not behaving well and hiding behind pseudonyms, there's some truth in what you say, but that applies to almost all personal stuff on the Internet doesn't it? Standards of politeness have gone downhill greatly in recent times, have you had to use public transport recently in the rush hour? Maybe things would be better if we all used our real names. When I joined TNF several years ago, I lurked for a while at first, and got the impression that a forum name was what was required, though clearly that's not really the case. I just used the name on my business e-mail, but I've never made any secret of my true identity when having personal contact with other members. I've met several at Goodwood and other places over the years, I've been well within punching distance, and no-one has taken a swing so far, so I hope I've never given any offence to anyone.

Our moderator TW won't thank me for saying this, but surely the best course would be to report any contributions you don't like to him. I'd agree that standards of politeness have deteriorated a little recently, but if badly behaved posters are regularly reported to him, I'm sure he'd take whatever he considers to be appropriate action eventually, though I think he's very reluctant to go as far as banning people.

I haven't a lot of experience of other forums, but TNF seems to me to be still be for the most part one of the most polite and gentlemanly, it would be a great shame to lose that.

On posters not behaving well and hiding behind pseudonyms, there's some truth in what you say, but that applies to almost all personal stuff on the Internet doesn't it? Standards of politeness have gone downhill greatly in recent times, have you had to use public transport recently in the rush hour? Maybe things would be better if we all used our real names. When I joined TNF several years ago, I lurked for a while at first, and got the impression that a forum name was what was required, though clearly that's not really the case. I just used the name on my business e-mail, but I've never made any secret of my true identity when having personal contact with other members. I've met several at Goodwood and other places over the years, I've been well within punching distance, and no-one has taken a swing so far, so I hope I've never given any offence to anyone.

I had already mentioned what I see as a drop in etiquette to the moderator some weeks ago.

I do hope you did not think my comment was in any way directed at you. That is certainly not the case. I admit that the only public transport I have used reently are airlines, perhaps not quite what you meant! TNF is not as bad as political forums. They are very often unpleasant places - people get so het up and turn nasty.

But do expect to find a better class of person here! And mostly, of course, I do. And I am grateful fo their knowlegde and wit.

I think the general politeness on TNF stems largely from the fact that most of its members grew up in an age when manners meant something. Today what was once social etiquette is largely ignored.

I don't "hide" behind a username - I simply use the same one for the several forums I follow because otherwise my slowly deteriorating grey matter would forget which was which. The members of Ten-Tenths are by and large a decent bunch, but there are the occasional spats when one member doesn't agree that Senna was God. But as for Pistonheads - words fail me. If they have moderators they are conspicuous by their absence. I joined in order to interact on the Classic Cars forum, but on occasion I proffered an opinion on general motoring matters, only to wish I hadn't bothered.

If you're prepared to counter personal abuse on an epic scale, that's your forum of choice. Quite extraordinary.

I don't "hide" behind a username - I simply use the same one for the several forums I follow because otherwise my slowly deteriorating grey matter would forget which was which.

You can always continue with your user name, but sign posts with your real name There was a bit of a campaign along these lines a few years back, which resulted in several regulars doing just that

You can always continue with your user name, but sign posts with your real name.

Well, at least I'm halfway there...

On a more serious note, I go for partial anonymity on forums in an attempt to reduce spam. As one of our 'full-frontal' members, perhaps David can tell us if it does anything to achieve that aim.

As another 'full-frontal' I'm not aware of getting any (additional) spam as a result of using my real name here, but can't be certain, obviously.

Edited by Tim Murray, 09 April 2013 - 18:07.

As another 'full-frontal' I'm not aware of getting any (additional) spam as a result of using my real name here, but can't be certain, obviously.

Nor am I but, as Tim says, who knows?

Ditto

No problem here with 'TNF spam' either although, from other sources, I can recommend a selection of Canadian pharmacies.

...I can recommend a selection of Canadian pharmacies.

"Mine's bigger than yours?"

Back on topic, I bought the new one, for the first time for a couple of years, and by and large I like it (apart from the Hall of fame bit which is the usual nobodies-with-somebodies photo-trash).

Not sure about the cartoon, the artist is good so it seems a bit of a waste.

I agree that the banner isn't as good.

Frankel I can tolerate, just.

Roebuck is always good - he trotted out some of his Amon memories, with another reference to the stillborn biog - if he remembers the conversations with CAA so well, or if he still has his notes, why not write it again? We still need a proper biog of Chris, the Young one was poor IMHO. (and who was the 'publisher' who skipped, I wonder)

User names - when I joined most used nicknames, and now the grey matter is so worn-out I daren't change for fear of forgetting how to sign in to various fora where I'm macca..........

Paul M

We still need a proper biog of Chris, the Young one was poor IMHO

One was written by TNFer Michael Clark a couple of years back

Two or three apostrophic atrocities and a typo (in a recent email to subscribers) - "Browse a wide selection of images from the Motor Sport magazine archive, including all ‘Parting shot’ images since 2008. Images are available in a variety of formats, from mugs and jigsaws to high-quality framed prints. Subscriber's get a 5% discount on all purchasers by using voucher code..." and "Thank you to all our subscriber's who came and joined us for a cuppa and chat in our exclusive subscribers area."

Perhaps unsurprising given the young shavers in Chelsea Wharf who presumably came through the education systems at a time when the system didn't give two hoots about spelling, grammar and punctuation.

The first thing that caught my eye on the cover of the latest issue of Motor Sport was a plug for Doug Nye's contribution. The second thing though was that Adolf Hitler's name appeared a couple of lines down in the same block of type in connection with his article. I haven't read the piece yet, so I don't know how adulatory is, but I do hope this doesn't mean that Doug has gone all right-wing, or otherwise politically extreme on us, though we already know that he's particularly fond of silver pre-WW2 racing cars.

Fear not, I remain politically confused (aren't the majority of us?)...somewhere to the left of Roebuck, to the right of Chairman Mao, and most decidedly far more anarchist than ever, ever, neo-Nazi. And you?

DCN

Fear not, I remain politically confused (aren't the majority of us?)...somewhere to the left of Roebuck, to the right of Chairman Mao, and most decidedly far more anarchist than ever, ever, neo-Nazi. And you?

DCN

Me? More middle-of-the-road than the white line, but that Genghis Khan did have some really good ideas, especially on law'norder....

I really really hope it's not going to include a cartoon depiction of him trying to rescue Roger Williamson...

I'm pleased to see that some subtlety has been applied...

Fear not, I remain politically confused (aren't the majority of us?)...somewhere to the left of Roebuck, to the right of Chairman Mao, and most decidedly far more anarchist than ever, ever, neo-Nazi. And you?

DCN

I am not sure it is technically possible to be to the right of Mr Roebuck, not without the risk of being detained at Her Majesty's pleasure. I enjoy his writing but as a paid up pinko liberal I do occasionally have to take some very deep breaths. Just reading your rant about Ronzo in Octane's GTO/F1 piece- what a tightarse , offering to sell your book to you at full price....

Fear not, I remain politically confused (aren't the majority of us?)...somewhere to the left of Roebuck, to the right of Chairman Mao, and most decidedly far more anarchist than ever, ever, neo-Nazi. And you?

DCN

Mr.Roebuck and an Austrian friend talk politics.......

Mr.Roebuck and an Austrian friend talk politics.......

That look on Gerhard's face tells me he's just waiting for the camera to go before he gives one of his fellow-countryman's salutes.

I've always admired Simon Taylor's work but I'm astonished at his admission in this thread he gave the subject of an interview copy approval before publication.

I can't think of any branch of journalism other than motorsport writing where such a thing would be seen as usual practice.

This highlights an interesting difference between what might be described as real 'journalism' and an enthusiast writer writing a story intended for other enthusiasts. I have nearly always run a text draft past an interview subject in order for my misunderstandings, errors and transcription cock-ups to be corrected before they are committed to posterity. The one thing I - and I am sure Simon too - won't give a subject the chance to alter is the writer's personal attitude, interpretation, opinion or knowledge. Over decades this has ensured that at least future historians can rest pretty much assured that what X is quoted as saying, was accepted by him as what he meant to say. The rest of the written piece is down to the author, and if it's wrong then it's his fault (as I am too often painfully aware).

Jobbing journalists - writing on a whole range of real-life subjects about which they know or understand Sweet FA - may proudly defend their national press independence and the fact that none of their quoted subjects saw what was written before it was published...but my word, aren't they and their proprietors reluctant ever to provide equal space corrections to put the record straight afterwards? Much of Leveson is grossly OTT, but in essence the so-called 'free press' had been clog dancing on a greenhouse roof for years, and have deserved the result of it shattering and them falling through it, into petty restriction and legal sanction. In my lengthy experience many 'proper' journalists at nationally-recognised level have in common unusual arrogance, conceit and dismissive superiority. Of course, where political journalists are concerned these days, the journalists often have much about which to feel superior.

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 27 April 2013 - 21:19.

I've always admired Simon Taylor's work but I'm astonished at his admission in this thread he gave the subject of an interview copy approval before publication.

I can't think of any branch of journalism other than motorsport writing where such a thing would be seen as usual practice.

Huh. I can't think of any branch of journalism that wouldn't be improved by writers checking what they thought they heard. The number of misstatements or outright misrepresentations about current events, scientific breakthroughs or just plain science would drop hugely if expansion on comments and corrections were done before the sensationalism set in.
grack

I have nearly always run a text draft past an interview subject in order for my misunderstandings, errors and transcription cock-ups to be corrected before they are committed to posterity. The one thing I - and I am sure Simon too - won't give a subject the chance to alter is the writer's personal attitude, interpretation, opinion or knowledge. Over decades this has ensured that at least future historians can rest pretty much assured that what X is quoted as saying, was accepted by him as what he meant to say. The rest of the written piece is down to the author, and if it's wrong then it's his fault (as I am too often painfully aware).

DCN

Thank you, Doug - you and me both. I have not given, and will not give, any interviewee "copy approval". All comments, judgements, verdicts, third-person summaries and descriptions in my "Lunch With..." interviews are purely mine, and I would never allow the subject of the piece to influence or alter them.

Actually, in the eighty-six Lunch With... interviews I have now done for Motor Sport over the past seven years, only three interviewees have asked to be allowed to check my transcription of what they had said. In each of those three cases, due to the conditions under which the interview was carried out, or because of the complexity of the material or apparent contradictions within it, I decided that it was appropriate to agree, having explained to them that this would be a fact-checking process only. Tony Brooks, a precise man who quite rightly cares about historical detail, was one of the three, and was anxious to ensure that I had not made any of what Doug accurately refers to as misunderstandings, errors and transcription cock-ups.

That was why I was so annoyed that the silly error of mine about Sebring/Watkins Glen crept in. Rather than making what Pacificquay refers to as "an admission", I felt that TNF - along with the next edition for the magazine itself - would be an appropriate place, before a generally highly informed readership with a concern for history, to set the record straight. Insofar as future generations may use our poor contributions as some sort of source of historical record, all of us scratchers have a responsibility to get our facts right for posterity.

Therefore, thank you too, Grackle. I agree with you that journalists who are prepared to check what they thought they heard would help to improve the general accuracy of what I suppose we now have to call "The Meeja."

Edited by Simon Taylor, 27 April 2013 - 22:16.

I am not sure it is technically possible to be to the right of Mr Roebuck, not without the risk of being detained at Her Majesty's pleasure. I enjoy his writing but as a paid up pinko liberal I do occasionally have to take some very deep breaths. Just reading your rant about Ronzo in Octane's GTO/F1 piece- what a tightarse , offering to sell your book to you at full price....

I have to admit that I've never seen a single issue of Octane, but although Ron Dennis is a man I have almost unbounded admiration for, I'd just love to know more about this incident. Maybe Ron thinks that DCN is wealthier than he is and could well afford it...?

Insofar as future generations may use our poor contributions as some sort of source of historical record, all of us scratchers have a responsibility to get our facts right for posterity.

Simon - makes a point which is so valid. There's a tendency to believe a caption, in this case, probably a typo but the current issue has a photo of a Lotus 49 described as Bruce McLaren inspecting the front of his car...

. . . proudly defend their national press independence and the fact that none of their quoted subjects saw what was written before it was published...but my word, aren't they and their proprietors reluctant ever to provide equal space corrections to put the record straight afterwards?

Yes, an article late last year purporting to quote a cousin of mine and the editor of Burke's was not offered to the people "quoted". It would not have been, as there had been no contact with either in the first place and the journo or its contact was making it up as he went along. My cousin's solicitor wrote an appropriate letter to the Editor, and it may have been answered privately for all I know, but nothing has appeared in the paper concerned.

My passport has always described my 'profession' - no, come on, be fair - as 'Journalist'. When I was a kid I - up to the age of about 38-39 - I was quite proud of that. For many years now I have instead considered it to be more of an embarrassment.

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 28 April 2013 - 19:52.

Thank you to both Doug and Simon for their full responses.

Delighted to hear there was no copy approval going on.

My mind is back at ease!

Oooh, win! My local Asda appear to have started stocking Motor Sport, meaning I can pick both F1 Racing and Motor Sport up at the same time.

My passport has always described my 'profession' - no, come on, be fair - as 'Journalist'. When I was a kid I - up to the age of about 38-39 - I was quite proud of that. For many years now I have instead considered it to be more of an embarrassment.

DCN

It could be worse, very much worse. They could have had you down as a 'Banker'...

It could be worse, very much worse. They could have had you down as a 'Banker'...

Myth had it that James Hunt declared his profession to be "window cleaner". However I do not recall the time when one's profession was shown in a passport, it must be many moons ago.

Myth had it that James Hunt declared his profession to be "window cleaner". However I do not recall the time when one's profession was shown in a passport, it must be many moons ago.

It was the first item on the "description" list on page 2 in the blue old style British Passport, before we had the harmonised modern jobs. Can't remember when the change started, but the old one I just found expired in 1992.

If you want to moan - you only have a look at Autosport. Once Pit & Paddock was full of solid short articles, pictures and fascinating news filed by an enthusiastic, investigative and knowledgeable editorial team which extended up to eight pages on occasions. It was always positioned at the beginning of the magazine reflecting its importance, now it has diminished to the level of soundbite floss - grabbed from the wires and PR releases - that wanders to different positions week by week.

I think I should defend Autosport. We had comment on here that in an alleged Golden Era many rumours originated in the Autosport offices to fill up space. A quick comparison of press releases and Autosport articles back in the day shows a surprising correlation. As it is, there was a three-pager on PreMa Racing that told me more about a 20 year veteran team than I would have got for its equivalent in 1991 (was there ever such an article on Osella or Coloni even when they were in F1?).

Last week's issue had more NASCAR coverage than the whole of 1973 did. It's actually shocking reading some of the material on here how much racing was going on around the world, and there was no acknowledgment in the British media, but a 3 lap dash at Snetterton would occupy half-a-page. Think of e.g. the Soviet racing thread. Not saying that it's better or worse, or that it is logistically much easier nowadays, but tempora mutantur.

As for Andrew Frankel, if you don't like him, ignore him. I would agree on expanding the book reviews, though - and review more. It seems a bit odd that the second edition of the book listing selected extracts of Grand Prix results gets a second round of praise from all and sundry, for example, when there are many other books that could do with a critical eye.

It was the first item on the "description" list on page 2 in the blue old style British Passport, before we had the harmonised modern jobs. Can't remember when the change started, but the old one I just found expired in 1992.

Well I've just looked at my old style British passports issued in 1985 & 1986 (one for the Arab lands & one for Israel) and there is no provision in either for one's profession as you suggest, Alan.

PS Just discovered that in 1982, the holder's occupation and country of residence were removed.

Edited by Giraffe, 29 April 2013 - 09:10.

Perhaps Andrew Frankel has taken some of our comments to heart. Instead of road testing exotic cars for lottery winners and the like, he has gone to the other extreme and tested the cheapest car on the UK market, the Dacia Sandero.