Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

F1 Racing (magazine) and F1 media in general...(merged)


  • Please log in to reply
1079 replies to this topic

#851 oetzi

oetzi
  • Member

  • 2,987 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 02 February 2012 - 02:00

I was trying to state that someone saying they "contribute to someone's wages" is suggesting somehow buying a magazine elevates them a position of influence/importance, when it doesn't. I buy a magazine , I don't contribute to the wages of those who work for the magazine.

That's just silliness.

You contribute to revenue, revenue goes to company account, wages come from company account, therefore you contribute to wages.

For a paid title, no sales = no readership = no advertising & no sales revenue = no publication = no wages.



Advertisement

#852 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,616 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 02 February 2012 - 08:03

So what you're saying is someone is guilty of hyperbole to advance their own interests? Shocking.


yeah.....but enough about TheBunk, what about this Purcell guy? :lol:

#853 slideways

slideways
  • Member

  • 3,268 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 02 February 2012 - 08:20

Wtf Ross, you broke the barrier into second sentences!

#854 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,537 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 February 2012 - 09:06

I was trying to state that someone saying they "contribute to someone's wages" is suggesting somehow buying a magazine elevates them a position of influence/importance, when it doesn't. I buy a magazine , I don't contribute to the wages of those who work for the magazine.


Erm. I'm a customer! Surely that is the most important position one can hold!

..... Well..... According to most business texts......

Edited by maverick69, 02 February 2012 - 09:07.


#855 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 February 2012 - 12:51

yeah.....but enough about TheBunk, what about this Purcell guy? :lol:



Yeah yeah, its all my fault. Lets pretend this happens every week. :down:

#856 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,616 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:06

Yeah yeah, its all my fault. Lets pretend this happens every week. :down:


sorry but your credibility in this discussion dissipated when you compared the Autosport editorial team's work to independent journalism like were (sic) living in some dictator run third world country with the methods of narrow minded copy cat working of a communist party bureau of censorship.


.....so we'll leave it at that eh?



#857 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:24

It was a dumb analogy but his read on what happened isn't far fetchd.

#858 Apollonius

Apollonius
  • Member

  • 601 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:30

Frankly the staff at Autosport (and the admin staff here) treat their buying public as idiots with these shenanigans. The pathetic way admin here have attempted to stifle debate about this article is laughable at best. poor form.

#859 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:46

sorry but your credibility in this discussion dissipated when you compared the Autosport editorial team's work to independent journalism like were (sic) living in some dictator run third world country with the methods of narrow minded copy cat working of a communist party bureau of censorship.


.....so we'll leave it at that eh?


Well, I once did some research on how Egypts newspapers were run. Any bad stuff about Mubarak was filtered, and it was littered with praise articles on him.

Go take a look at Autosports main page now, and try to find any, tiniest critical article on Mclaren. The only article that mentioned they were 'whupped' last year, was pulled. Not even a mention Hamilton is under speech control now, too, when asked about the Sutil case yesterday. Glory, glory hallelujah.

Perhaps the analogy was a bit overdone, but my main objection stays the same: a big F1 team meddling in (request) to have an article pulled. Not simply altered, or corrected, but totally removed. I find that shocking. The argument all teams do that doesnt go either. In fact, I know lots of instances where Ferrari/Schumacher/Mercedes got burned down to the ground. Apparently then the relationship wasnt important. Or maybe they just dont care that much. That Mclaren has so much influence is worrying and baffling. I never expected Autosport to do such a thing. I guess now we know where they stand.

Frankly the staff at Autosport (and the admin staff here) treat their buying public as idiots with these shenanigans. The pathetic way admin here have attempted to stifle debate about this article is laughable at best. poor form.


I disagree. The forum is as open as anything and the moderating staff are in no way connected to what happens in the editor room. The views from them expressed in this thread are on personal title, and not because they are told to do so. At least thats my impression.

Edited by TheBunk, 02 February 2012 - 15:49.


Advertisement

#860 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:46

I don't think anyone has been removed from this thread, all they were doing was asking in the McLaren thread that we not pollute a discussion about the car or the team. And the BB admins aren't really connected to the parent website.

#861 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,616 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:48

It was a dumb analogy but his read on what happened isn't far fetchd.


i'm just suggesting a little perspective Ross, this was a mis-placed article that was pulled without 'adequate explanation', not the McCarthy hearings.

#862 Apollonius

Apollonius
  • Member

  • 601 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:51

I don't think anyone has been removed from this thread, all they were doing was asking in the McLaren thread that we not pollute a discussion about the car or the team. And the BB admins aren't really connected to the parent website.



Please mate, do you really believe that? Of course the BB Admin are connected to the parent site - the name is plastered all over it! The forum is hosted on an Autosport domain! LOLOLOL!!!!

#863 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,442 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:51

Go take a look at Autosports main page now, and try to find any, tiniest critical article on Mclaren.


It could be a conspiracy, or it could be that the season hasn't started yet and there is not too much to be critical of.

The only article that mentioned they were 'whupped' last year, was pulled.


It could be a conspiracy, or Autosport may have looked at it and decided that it didn't meet their journalistic standards.

Not even a mention Hamilton is under speech control now, too, when asked about the Sutil case yesterday. Glory, glory hallelujah.


It could be a conspiracy, or since Sutil can still appeal it may be politic for Hamilton to consider the matter sub-judice.

a big F1 team meddling in (request) to have an article pulled.


It could be a consipracy, but other theories exist and none of them have been confirmed or denied.

#864 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:52

this was a mis-placed article


According to Noble, and others, nothing mis-placed about it, and was only pulled 'on request'.

Edited by TheBunk, 02 February 2012 - 15:57.


#865 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:54

LOLOLOL but no

The moderators are volunteers. They get chosen by Pascal(I think he's still in charge?) who was put in place by bira. Autosport and Haymarket keep their hands out of the bulletin board. Because for them we're really only a legal risk, and a bit of banner advertising.

Sure, if someone started posting confidential information about the company it'd be removed but there isn't any editorial monitoring of the forum. Beyond the curiosity of wondering what the readers are interested in.

#866 Apollonius

Apollonius
  • Member

  • 601 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:55

It could be a conspiracy, or since Sutil can still appeal it may be politic for Hamilton to consider the matter sub-judice.



Come on bro!! Forum lawyering is BS at the best of times but that takes the biscuit. I'm not suggesting conspiracy but it's got sod all to do with an appeal.


#867 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,537 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:55

Go take a look at Autosports main page now, and try to find any, tiniest critical article on Mclaren. The only article that mentioned they were 'whupped' last year, was pulled.


<cut paste>

The real reason it was pulled was because anything contentious that could be verified was factually incorrect:

1) "There are technical innovations on this car which will be immediately obvious when you see them"

No there isn't.

2) "We started way behind in the last couple of years"

What. Like 2010 you mean?

3) "There's no trickery on the cars"

How does he know this? Red Bull are probably the most secretive team on the grid. Do you really believe that the intimate working knowledge of the concepts and systems that make their car so fast would be spread as far as a satellite operation of McLaren? Gimme a break!

Finally, the so called journalist (first ever "article" for Autosport BTW) reports that "It is understood that McLaren are focussing on single lap speed with the MP4-27 which it hopes will allow it to take more pole positions and control races from the front"

Yesterday, when Goss was actually asked that specific question he quite categorically said that they were more focussed on getting the best out of the tyres during the race!

So if anything that could be verified was found to be bullshit - then what does it say for the rest of the article?

Think about it...........

Not even a mention Hamilton is under speech control now, too, when asked about the Sutil case yesterday. Glory, glory hallelujah.


That case may go to appeal. Saying nothing about it is the only sensible thing to do.

#868 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:55

It could be a conspiracy, or it could be that the season hasn't started yet and there is not too much to be critical of.



It could be a conspiracy, or Autosport may have looked at it and decided that it didn't meet their journalistic standards.



It could be a conspiracy, or since Sutil can still appeal it may be politic for Hamilton to consider the matter sub-judice.



It could be a consipracy, but other theories exist and none of them have been confirmed or denied.



Yea, well each their own. Ive nothing against a positive launch, with lots of quotes on how great and big and good things/cars/drivers/development are gonna be, but ONLY good stories is a bit boring nevermind predictable.

I enjoyed Buttons quotes, though.

#869 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,537 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:57

According to Noble, and others, nothing mis-placed about it, and as only pulled 'on request'.


Beacuse it was bullshit - as proven.

#870 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:58

It hasn't been proven that he didn't say what he said.

#871 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 February 2012 - 15:59

That case may go to appeal. Saying nothing about it is the only sensible thing to do.



They could not inform Lewis before the launch to say this himself? Or just say something nice about Sutil at all that would defuse things between them?

#872 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 3,523 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 02 February 2012 - 16:00

Beacuse it was bullshit - as proven.


Nothing is proven. For example McLaren will update their car for the tests.

Edited by Diablobb81, 02 February 2012 - 16:00.


#873 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,442 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 02 February 2012 - 16:01

It hasn't been proven that he didn't say what he said.


You can't prove a negative.


#874 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,537 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 February 2012 - 16:05

It hasn't been proven that he didn't say what he said.


No..... But anything that was verifable was factually incorrect! Ergo the article massively lacked credibility!

And given just how far off from reality those quotes were, you have to seriously consider if he said them at all.



#875 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 February 2012 - 16:05

How is that relevant?

The question is primarily did he say what he said. If he didn't, then by all means pull the article. If he said it but was talking nonsense, that's probably a good reason to not run the story to begin with. But here's the thing. They pulled the story a day before the car came out, so there was no way for them to know the car would be different from how he said.

McLaren requested it be pulled, end of.

#876 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,442 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 02 February 2012 - 16:10

McLaren requested it be pulled, end of.


I assume you were replying to me :wave: 45k posts and still not quite grasped the quote funtion...

You can't prove McLaren requested it to be pulled. Likely; but you can't prove it. As I posted before, the quotes from the non-motorsport McLaren guy were at total odds to the character of his quotes made to other publications.


#877 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 February 2012 - 16:13

They weren't out of character, they were of different tone in a different context. They don't contradict each other. Particularly if you read my previous post about how I think the sequence of events occurred. It was most likely off the record, or on the record but on another topic so McGrath didn't think they'd end up in a racing article.

Jon Noble said they were asked to take down the story. Maybe it was Force India?

I think the silliest thing in all of it was given the source of the quotes, the context of the quotes, and the delivery of the quotes; that they should have talked to McLaren(the race team) for their own comment before running it. Which is the kind of thing you tend to do in the 'real' news world.

#878 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 29 May 2012 - 14:02

http://www.bbc.co.uk...at_mclaren.html

Better to laugh/cry/cheer about Andrew Bensons latest contribution to the world of F1 journalism here, than to drag driver threads off topic.

Benson shows an interesting lack of memory, and paints an F1 world that is full of options for Lewis Hamilton. Do you agree? I think I made my point of view clear in a recent discussion so ill just wait and see what others think. Ill add this: I think in general, the standards, or lack of, in British motorsport journalism is starting to become appalingly low. Autosport still has reasonable reports, but what the BBC and The Guardian recently cook up is beyond any acceptable means. Its not about the drivers themselves anymore, but just about the journalists big egos and easy score headlines.

Edited by TheBunk, 29 May 2012 - 14:06.


#879 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,537 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 29 May 2012 - 14:07

http://www.bbc.co.uk...at_mclaren.html

Better to laugh/cry/cheer about Andrew Bensons latest contribution to the world of F1 journalism here, than to drag driver threads off topic.

Benson shows an interesting lack of memory, and paints an F1 world that is full of options for Lewis Hamilton. Do you agree? I think I made my point of view clear in a recent discussion so ill just wait and see what others think.


Maybe Joe Saward has got it wrong too........

"The only decent gossip in Monaco was that after Mark Webber goes to Ferrari in 2013, Sebastian Vettel might go there in 2014. I have a feeling he is tied into Red Bull for longer than that, so I’m not sure that will happen. The original idea was to have Webber for two years and then take Sergio Perez when he grows up, but the from Sauber is that his boots are now a bit small (or is he too big for his boots?) and he needs to stop believing his own PR and deliver more results if he wants to be on the red team.

The other rumour is that Lewis Hamilton might replace Webber."


http://joesaward.wordpress.com/

Advertisement

#880 joshb

joshb
  • Member

  • 3,286 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 29 May 2012 - 14:10

http://www.bbc.co.uk...at_mclaren.html

Better to laugh/cry/cheer about Andrew Bensons latest contribution to the world of F1 journalism here, than to drag driver threads off topic.

Benson shows an interesting lack of memory, and paints an F1 world that is full of options for Lewis Hamilton. Do you agree? I think I made my point of view clear in a recent discussion so ill just wait and see what others think.


I have to break into a wry smile when I see words to the effect of "With good reason, he regards himself as the fastest in the world and it pains him that he has won only one world title so far." every single time he writes about Lewis. As if the world is so unfair.

I think he has options, as I'm sure every team on the grid would want his services but its either Mclaren, a team which isn't likely to be competitive or to upset the boat at a current team by joining another #1 driver.

#881 TheBunk

TheBunk
  • Member

  • 4,083 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 29 May 2012 - 14:18

I have to break into a wry smile when I see words to the effect of "With good reason, he regards himself as the fastest in the world and it pains him that he has won only one world title so far." every single time he writes about Lewis. As if the world is so unfair.

I think he has options, as I'm sure every team on the grid would want his services but its either Mclaren, a team which isn't likely to be competitive or to upset the boat at a current team by joining another #1 driver.


You should read this blog from a year ago. Its exactly the same.

http://www.bbc.co.uk..._bull.html#more

#882 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 May 2012 - 14:37

Has anyone else seen F1 Racing has thankfully rid itself of Hans Seeberg as editor, former editor of Nuts magazine (I kid you not). I'm a subscriber but have been very apathetic with the mag in recent times, i'm just hoping it will now change for the better.

#883 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,537 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 29 May 2012 - 14:39

Has anyone else seen F1 Racing has thankfully rid itself of Hans Seeberg as editor, former editor of Nuts magazine (I kid you not). I'm a subscriber but have been very apathetic with the mag in recent times, i'm just hoping it will now change for the better.


I has seemed like a comic of late!

#884 dank

dank
  • Member

  • 5,191 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 29 May 2012 - 15:46

Who has taken over?

#885 Felix

Felix
  • Member

  • 707 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 29 May 2012 - 16:11

Who has taken over?


Anthony Rowlinson - perfect for the job

#886 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,588 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 29 May 2012 - 16:20

I has seemed like a comic of late!

Of late? It always was. Leave it on the rack and buy something credible instead.

#887 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,537 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 29 May 2012 - 16:22

Of late? It always was. Leave it on the rack and buy something credible instead.


Was it? Maybe that's because I was 15 when it first hit the shelves!

#888 John Player

John Player
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 29 May 2012 - 16:55

So that picture of Webber wearing a red Mugello t-shirt was really a hint.

#889 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 18 June 2012 - 11:03

Jesus - the front cover of this month's issue "JENSON VS SILVERSTONE - Why Button now has the car to win the British GP at last"

Strange timing, even before Canada, but that's now 4 consecutive woeful races for JB and now they're hyping him to win the British GP.

It's something i've noticed about F1 Racing for a long time, they seem so clueless about what's currently happening in F1. I remember they put a segment in their news section about the Mercedes DDRS (long after it had already been figured out in the media), saying it's so effective because it stalls the rear wing, mentioning nothing about what it means for the front wing and how this affects the whole set-up of the car - fail.

#890 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,204 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 18 June 2012 - 19:58

Isn't that the main problem with most monthly magazines that they are (or seem to) be behind the ball game?

#891 Octavian

Octavian
  • Member

  • 703 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 18 June 2012 - 21:39

Isn't that the main problem with most monthly magazines that they are (or seem to) be behind the ball game?


Yep - that's why I cancelled my subscription to F1 Racing mag, it's pretty dross when you're reading previews of races that have already happened and analysis of race weekends which are two to three races old.
There's so much in depth coverage online and so much insight (especially on forums like this) that magazines are becoming less and less relevant. They do have some good technical articles and other features but again is it worth paying the money for a magazine that you're going to read five or six pages of? I do however think they become more insightful in the off season.

#892 ryan86

ryan86
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 18 June 2012 - 22:02

They had a feature in last months magazine profiling all drivers who had won just the one championship race (I've thought this would make an interesting book one day as there is lots of fascinating stories there). Unfortunately between this feature going to print, another driver (Maldonado) had joined this club and the feature was already out of date.

I know they want the headlines to grab you (and Autosport do this as well), by making an editorial decision to go along the lines of "Why di Resta will be Scotland's next champion" or "Sauber: The Best Car on the Grid?", then an article with cherrypicked facts that vaguely fit the story and are generally unconvincing.

#893 Imperial

Imperial
  • Member

  • 2,715 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 19 June 2012 - 21:56

LOLOLOL but no

The moderators are volunteers. They get chosen by Pascal(I think he's still in charge?) who was put in place by bira. Autosport and Haymarket keep their hands out of the bulletin board. Because for them we're really only a legal risk, and a bit of banner advertising.

Sure, if someone started posting confidential information about the company it'd be removed but there isn't any editorial monitoring of the forum. Beyond the curiosity of wondering what the readers are interested in.


Just dipping into this and I appreciate you wrote the above several months ago, so things may have changed, but I personally have been subject to a 'correction' by an Autosport writer who PM'd me direct to express his displeasure at what I had written on this very BB.

#894 BetaVersion

BetaVersion
  • Member

  • 689 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 20 June 2012 - 00:32

Just a quick curiosity, does this magazine still bring technical stuff, like the supposed downforce values of an average F1 car and etc....

Thanks in advance

#895 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 20 June 2012 - 00:36

Just dipping into this and I appreciate you wrote the above several months ago, so things may have changed, but I personally have been subject to a 'correction' by an Autosport writer who PM'd me direct to express his displeasure at what I had written on this very BB.


But that's not really anything to do with the site. A driver could register and say they didn't like what someone had written.


#896 BullHead

BullHead
  • Member

  • 6,719 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 20 June 2012 - 07:25

They do include some forum quotes on feature articles sometimes, I think the race preview features (on the website). Also for a short while they started that poll thing, which they then put in the mag.

Edited by BullHead, 20 June 2012 - 07:25.


#897 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,204 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 19 July 2012 - 14:40

Joe Saward has a few paragraphs today about F1 media and young journalists: http://joesaward.wor...-and-champagne/

As you will gather if you read this column on a regular basis, there are an awful lot of Formula 1 websites that give the impression that they have people present at races and in the know, but the reality is that there are only a few that have real paddock access and can talk to the people involved. So, be warned, the websites that you are reading may simply be regurgitating news from material that is being published elsewhere, and they often put their own spin on the stories to make them look new and different. There are, would you believe, even agencies that make a living selling the regurgitated news that they have simply trawled up from the Internet, written by people who have rarely, if ever, been into an F1 paddock.

I get accused of elitism and such things when I write these facts, but this could not be further from the truth. I am always willing to help young journalists who try to be get into F1 and do it the right way, which is to get off their backsides and go and learn the job, make the contacts and not pretend to be doing it, while sitting at home. When I was a youngster going from race to race with a tent and a typewriter there were many people who helped me and I think we owe it to the sport to help develop new generations. I have no time at all for all the fraudsters who sit at home and complain that no-one will give them a pass.

You have to earn a place in F1 and precious few have the gumption to do it.

I am telling you all this just so you know that you need to be careful with the news sources that you read. There are some websites that trawl and analyse very well. There are an awful lot that do not. There are some publications and blogs that you might assume have people at every race, but you need to be very careful with that, because once again there are a lot of people who give the impression that they are present when they are not.



#898 JRizzle86

JRizzle86
  • Member

  • 2,087 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 19 July 2012 - 14:45

Joe Saward has a few paragraphs today about F1 media and young journalists: http://joesaward.wor...-and-champagne/


So what he is basically saying is. "These new media's stuff is rubbish, don't read that, read my rubbish. Its not factually correct but i'm older and wiser"....

#899 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,297 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 19 July 2012 - 14:53

There are plenty of people who go to the paddock and are still shit.

Advertisement

#900 goingthedistance

goingthedistance
  • Member

  • 2,279 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 19 July 2012 - 22:00

There are plenty of people who go to the paddock and are still shit.


Most of them. The journos in the paddock are almost all compromised, beholden to the teams and Bernie and consequently toothless. By and large they are letting the fans down, as feathering their own beds means never asking the hard questions. Look at these press conferences - the quality of questions is just terrible.