27 replies to this topic

[primer]

...and produce a b*****d child.

Listen, I don't really want to complain about a free service, you get what you pay for and so on. Since Autosport news is free I expect nothing from you guys. Nevertheless, I can't help notice a degradation from earlier Autosport standards: Hirvonen earns Castrol Rankings rise. Is this now considered news?

[kar]

...and produce a b*****d child.

Listen, I don't really want to complain about a free service, you get what you pay for and so on. Since Autosport news is free I expect nothing from you guys. Nevertheless, I can't help notice a degradation from earlier Autosport standards: Hirvonen earns Castrol Rankings rise. Is this now considered news?

Well I do pay for Autosport.com, and this really, for me, is the last straw.

[sidepodcast]

this may or may not be of use, but i too was annoyed by the inclusion of the castrol rankings piece in my news feed.

to solve this, i created a custom feed that removes all mentions of "castrol rankings" from the title or description of a post. you are welcome to subscribe here:

http://bit.ly/autosportsansrankings

that is the main autosport feed, untouched except for the removal of said nonsense.

[kar]

Also, on a slightly more serious note. One of the main drawcards of being a subscriber is, supposedly, that you get an ad free version of the site.

While I realise I'm not subjected to the utterly insane 'free' layout (that could only be bettered by the inclusioin of animated gifs), that stupid castrol rankings box on the right side is clearly advertising.

It provides no value, and goes against the supposed benefit of an ad-free website. Worse, it occupies prime real estate in a site already starved of well-used space.

Basically this whole thing sucks and I struggle to think of any redeeming factor other than that haymarket must be getting paid for it all.

Edited by kar, 24 January 2010 - 22:10.

[potmotr]

I presume Castrol are tipping a fair bit of cash into Autosport and their website to get such PR trash into the news section...

[sidepodcast]

I presume Castrol are tipping a fair bit of cash into Autosport and their website to get such PR trash into the news section...

of that there is no doubt. the question is, will the fallout damage the site's reputation? and if so, is it worth it?

is does appear to be a miscalculation on a rather grand scale though.

[kar]

I presume Castrol are tipping a fair bit of cash into Autosport and their website to get such PR trash into the news section...

Which would be good if it meant more, quality, content went into the features or other portions of the site. Sadly it's the opposite. There's one columnist worth reading anymore, the majority of content now is trite filler. It's sad but Castrol rankings is Autosport.com's Jump the Shark moment.

There's so many little things that have happened over the past two years to basically bring us to this point. But this castrol nonsense, truly, is the final straw.

Edited by kar, 24 January 2010 - 22:14.

[potmotr]

is does appear to be a miscalculation on a rather grand scale though.

Perhaps they figure we'll take the pain for continued free access to the website?

Uncle Rupert wants to start charging...

[kar]

Perhaps they figure we'll take the pain for continued free access to the website?

Uncle Rupert wants to start charging...

Adblock + greasemonkey, solved.

[primer]

Adblock + greasemonkey, solved.

Actually this is what I meant by 'free'. I have Adblock plus and flashblock (among other extensions), so essentially I am getting news for free. But free or paid, including items such as these in the news section is terrible. Of all the motorsport websites, Autosport used to do the News* part ~mostly~ right. This is a departure from their standards, now it is increasingly difficult to tell Autosport apart from other garage/bedroom operated motorsport websites. Of course, I do not operate a motorsport website either, so who knows how bad things are financially. Seems everyone in the publication business is struggling.


(*I never cared for opinion pieces, the forums are far better for that since you get to interact with other enthusiasts and come across a variety of opinions, rather than some cod preaching about things.)

[Gilles4Ever]

Also, on a slightly more serious note. One of the main drawcards of being a subscriber is, supposedly, that you get an ad free version of the site.

While I realise I'm not subjected to the utterly insane 'free' layout (that could only be bettered by the inclusioin of animated gifs), that stupid castrol rankings box on the right side is clearly advertising.

It provides no value, and goes against the supposed benefit of an ad-free website. Worse, it occupies prime real estate in a site already starved of well-used space.

Basically this whole thing sucks and I struggle to think of any redeeming factor other than that haymarket must be getting paid for it all.

Out of curiosity, how did you feel about the Podcasts brought to us by Panasonic?

[potmotr]

Out of curiosity, how did you feel about the Podcasts brought to us by Panasonic?

They're two different things.

The podcasts were clearly sponsored by Panasonic.

The Castrol Rankings thing is advertising masquerading as editorial content.

Fine to have it sitting to one side of the website.

But when it is mingling with the regular stories and suddenly popping up on Jonathan Noble's Twitter you begin to wonder.

Seems a really odd step for a magazine which prides itself, and usually delivers, solid and accurate journalism.

Edited by potmotr, 25 January 2010 - 08:43.

[Rob]

The Castrol Rankings thing is advertising masquerading as editorial content.

Fine to have it sitting to one side of the website.

But when it is mingling with the regular stories and suddenly popping up on Jonathan Noble's Twitter you begin to wonder.

Seems a really odd step for a magazine which prides itself, and usually delivers, solid and accurate journalism.

Agreed. The Castrol Rankings thing is not news. Hell, it's not even interesting. It's an advert, plain and simple.

[TheRealMont]

Hello,

I would like to respond to Gilles4Ever, who compared the Castrol ranking with the Panasonic-sponsored podcasts.

In the podcasts, Autosport editorial team created an interesting product that was commercially backed by a sponsor - I do not think Panasonic had a say in what topics will be covered in every broadcast, or who will be the guests on that podcast.

In the drivers ranking, I think maybe the same thing has been done - the product in itself is produced and decided on by the editorial team?

However, in no point was Panasonic promoted as part of the news. When news-worthy items from the podcasts were reported on Autosport.com, Panasonic was not even mentioned. Examples:

IRL News: Wilson tips Dixon to wrap up title

...to be on Scott," said Wilson in an interview with the Autosport Podcast. "He just has to finish...

F1 News: Coulthard trusts Red Bull's potential

...to score a point this season, said in autosport.com's latest podcast that red bull have all the...

(I searched for Panasonic podcast and found no results. The above are examples of what comes up when searching just for 'podcast'. I cannot access the full reports, because I am no longer a subscriber.)

The podcasts were also not promoted in the news just for the sake of it: there were no stories like "Driver X will give an interview on the Autosport Podcast Backed By Panasonic."


It is very clear that the "Castrol Ranking" is being heavily promoted due to a commercial interest and not an editorial one, and this, for sure, is a line crossed. Not only for Autosport, but for any professional news organisation. Jonathan Noble is promoting it on Twitter because he truly believes it is news-worthy, or because it is commercially important to his publisher? Only he can respond to that, but I believe I do know the answer to this.

I believe it is the duty of every publisher to fully disclose commercial interest in the case of news reporting. Whenever The Times or other News Corp. newspapers report about Rupert Murdoch-related business, they add a disclaimer that states the newspaper is owned by News Corp. Yet when Autosport.com reported the enthusiastic endorsement by David Coulthard to the Castrol Ranking I wonder how many readers surmised that Coulthard is being paid for this by Castrol? And why there was no mention of this in the report - that DC was commenting on something he is paid for? When a celebrity promotes a product for money - it's called advertising. And every professional journalist and newspaper knows it is forbidden to disguise an advertisement as an editorial.

Autosport used to champion its professionalism, integrity and credibility. I do not think after this, Mr. Noble and his staff can make the same claim - neither to the web site's professionalism, nor to its integrity or credibility. Whatever Castrol is paying, it shouldn't be enough to cover the price tag of such a reputation destroyed.


I used to be a susbcriber, and while my subscription ended, I continued reading this web site and wondered if I should become a subscriber again once the Formula 1 season begins. Obviously, I shall not be renewing my subscription - after all, Castrol (a subsidiary of BP, one of the richest companies in the world, with 300+ billion profit per annum!) is now bankrolling Autosport, so it no longer needs my 30 quid.

Best wishes Mr. Noble and staff. And my condolences.

Monty.

Edited by TheRealMont, 25 January 2010 - 23:14.

[JForce]

I have recently resubbed for the year on Autosport.com, but given the news is free, I'm really beginning to reconsider. Dieter's articles are the only ones worth reading anymore...there's no more investigative journalism, there's simple regurgation of press releases. It's light, fluffy stuff, and it's a shame.

[kar]

I have recently resubbed for the year on Autosport.com, but given the news is free, I'm really beginning to reconsider. Dieter's articles are the only ones worth reading anymore...there's no more investigative journalism, there's simple regurgation of press releases. It's light, fluffy stuff, and it's a shame.

If you've paid for it, then there's no going back, there's no refunds.

I just cancelled my renewal.

Edited by kar, 26 January 2010 - 09:44.

[potmotr]

I still think it is well worth the small amount of change you have to part for the subscription.

We are the hard core after all.

There must be thousands of other subscribers not quite as addicted to F1.

[kar]

It's just not though. As JForce put it, there's only one F1 columnist worth reading, and frankly it's the only way you can meaningfully protest the way the site is being run.

This Castrol sell-out was just the tipping point.

[Ali_G]

I still can't believe that Autosport are trying to pass this tripe off as genuine news.

I'd like to think that this hairbrained scheme didn't come from the former AtlasF1 side of the operation.

[dank]

Bit of a strange one all this.

Whilst I can see why there has been an outpouring of ANGER and RAGE about Autosport.com running articles on the movements on the Castrol Ranking website, is it really all that bad? Can I perhaps remind you that you are all able to make decisions in life? It's up to you whether you choose to read the articles or not.

I know some of us criticise the quality of Autosport at the moment, but I'm sure we're all agreed that it is still better than the other guff that festers on the Internet, and if the Castrol thingy-me-bob helps keep the site afloat, then I really couldn't care less.

[kar]

Bit of a strange one all this.

Whilst I can see why there has been an outpouring of ANGER and RAGE about Autosport.com running articles on the movements on the Castrol Ranking website, is it really all that bad? Can I perhaps remind you that you are all able to make decisions in life? It's up to you whether you choose to read the articles or not.

I know some of us criticise the quality of Autosport at the moment, but I'm sure we're all agreed that it is still better than the other guff that festers on the Internet, and if the Castrol thingy-me-bob helps keep the site afloat, then I really couldn't care less.

That's true but if Autosport sacrifice journalistic integrity by mixing and matching advertising and news you start being to have to begin questioning integrity elsewhere. Autosport.com used to be the one place you could bet the bank on for honesty and integrity.

There has been a gradual decline since 2008, but the decision to call this Castrol rubbish 'news', is the point where that stopped being the case. The recession and Haymarket's dwindling print revenues no doubt have seen a need to better monetise the site, while at the same time cutting costs. I understand that. We've seen the cost cutting manifest itself in the features content, most being regurgitated print material or by the numbers dross. And of course the increasingly shrill nature of the headlines and sadly, indeed of the writing in the news portion of the site.

Now with the increasingly intrusive and unseemly advertising presence they are trying to get more income. I doubt subscribers, really, contribute that much income to the operation. So what do they, really care, if they piss them off.

Yeah, this is all whinging, I know. But Autosport was *so* good, and now it's so mediocre. This Castrol stupidity just marks the line where Autosport went from being average, to being a bare step ahead of the likes of PlanetF1 et al.

Edited by kar, 27 January 2010 - 11:50.

[Hairpin]

Castrol ranking is great stuff and it puts an end to most of the previously endless discussions about who is best:

Click the cover below for an easy guide to the ins-and-outs of the world's most definitive and objective measurement of driver talent across all levels and disciplines of motorsport.

I mean, it's perfect. Stop complaining, check the Castrol ranking and update your opinion about the drivers accordingly.

Edited by Hairpin, 05 February 2010 - 12:50.

[slideways]

Yeah, this is all whinging, I know. But Autosport was *so* good, and now it's so mediocre.

I have just cancelled my resub after something like a decade. For me the loss of Scarbs was the last straw after losing all of the other decent contributors, but the castrol stunt really didn't help either. The high res images and forix are still great features but not enough to keep me paying unfortunately.

RIP atlas.

Edited by slideways, 05 February 2010 - 15:01.

[Risil]

Since no member of the Autosport.com team could be bothered to reply to this thread:

http://www.autosport...ne.php/id/82527

An improvement. I'm just about willing to accept these stories as 'Grapevine' 'news', still quite annoyed about the placement of the Castrol Rankings box on the right hand column, in what is supposed to be an ad-free site. Well, what I pay to be an ad-free site.

Edited by Risil, 30 March 2010 - 23:04.

[Alfisti]

You know, when Atlas wa staken over we all warned Autosport not to destroy it and get too stupid about the corporate side of the site. Most old timers knew that a subscription was the way to go for Atlas as the content was worth it and ads were never going to cover the bills.

The reason Atlas was successful was because it had integrity, absolute and total integrity. Haymarket is clearly not listening which surprises me because at least one hard core Atlas old timer still works there and you'd think he'd be walking around slapping the people responsible for integrity slip with a wet fish.

[Eli]

Is that Atlas old-timer me? Because I really don't feel like an Atlas old-timer. I feel an AUTOSPORTer and I don't feel I have to walk around slapping people. AtlasF1 happened ages ago and I can't believe you are still using it to support your points. Move on, adapt to the times, accept that fact that this is the internet and that even Youtube has annoying ads..

By the way, I'm all for integrity but integrity didn't pay the bills at AtlasF1.

[Alfisti]

No Ross, he's usually not shy to wake said fish about.

Agree that integrity did not pay the bills (from what we were told anyway), there is certainly a tricky line to manage. I think some members are suggesting that Haymarket is over stepping that line.

[Eli]

No offence to Ross, but since when does he write/edit/add news reports?