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

#151 LostProphet

LostProphet
  • Member

  • 1,175 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 17 June 2008 - 16:01

Originally posted by bradleyl
LostProphet, if that was all that irked, I think we can safely proclaim ourselves delighted! Thank you to everybody for the feedback, both positive and negative are valuable, and very much welcomed.


Oh absolutely! I was really impressed with the mag - the last few issues made me feel like I wasn't getting my monies worth (considering the subscription price has just gone up, and the issues were thinner) but this definitely went back to 'on track'

Really enjoyed the Webber interview!

Advertisement

#152 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 18 June 2008 - 08:44

I enjoyed the Webber one too. Which stood in stark contrast to quite possibly the worst interview ever conducted in the magazine with Lewis Hamilton. That was utterly awful.

I'll write a more constructive critique a bit later but my feelings are mixed. I do think, overall, the magazine has moved forward (most particularly in terms of the content) but I think it has a long way to go yet. I still can't help but shake the feeling the writers think their readers are morons. That they cannot read long sentences, let alone long paragraphs. That really. Irritates. Me. It's lame.

The 'new look' is actually the worst bit of it all for me. I really don't like it at all. I got a copy of my missus' 'Hello' magazine and to be honest on a few pages you could be forgiven for getting the two magazines mixed up. What some people say is cool, I rather think lame, attention seeking and tacky. The 'bling' cover can be forgiven (I actually thought that was okay) but such garish design really takes away from the sophistication of the sport and indeed of _some_ of the writing. But I think most disappointingly it took away from one of my favourite parts of the magazine - the parade. The photos there should be the absolute draw, with the garish, try-hard design the text steals from that.

And you can probably guess what I think of the lame 'witty' captions.

Ex-Nuts dep editor is utterly hopeless imo. He's a career journalist writing (boringly) about motorsport. Not a motorsport fan writing about his passion. That he is, at best, a peripheral fan of the sport comes across so strongly it's hard to take him very seriously.

To me, it seems as if the magazine is trying to cater to too many markets. It lacks coherence, it lacks any sort of sophistication now, and if that Hans joker doesn't get a passion injection, it lacks a lot of soul too.

This is not a problem though because Bishop had destroyed much of these elements too. But at least there was a veneer of sophistication which has now been lost.

The general quality of the written work though, despite my above reservations has improved. I also think the ordering of the content has improved. The short, sweet opinionated content is at the back, the interviews and contemporary features at the front. You can easily flow from page to page at the front, and then take your time and cherry pick at the back. I think it's easier to read that way.

Generally speaking I think the magazine is trying to cater to everyone and as a whole publication loses out for it. It also means though that there is something everyone can find interesting (I loved the Ferrari steering wheel feature for example). But I think it's probably now a news-stand read rather than a purchase. Which is though a step forward from the complete ignore it was a few months ago.

I'm just frustrated, there isn't a mature contemporary F1 magazine for grownups, something that doesn't treat it's reader as if they have just finished reading Loaded magazine and are interested in some cars. Motorsport Magazine is probably the closest out there, and I subscribe to that. It's a shame there isn't anything, yet, to rival that magazine for the F1 we watch every weekend.

#153 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 18 June 2008 - 08:46

Oh and the last point, Monaco issue was 122 pages, 22 of them adverts/advertorial. The Lewis Hamilton new-look issue 154 pages, 42 of them adverts/advertorial.

It felt like a far more substantial magazine at the news stand. Turns out for those extra 30 pages, only 10 of them were for content. That's fine I guess (and I'm being serious) but 2 pages of adverts for every page of extra content seems a bit much?

I hope though, that the extra content is a permanent thing not just a 'new-look' special. That would be very cynical.

#154 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 18 June 2008 - 08:56

Originally posted by bradleyl
Hi Boris, I think it's fair to say the magazine isn't being written for people inside the paddock.


That's not what Hans said in his editorial leader though :)

#155 Imperial

Imperial
  • Member

  • 2,715 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 18 June 2008 - 18:11

Originally posted by kar
I enjoyed the Webber one too. Which stood in stark contrast to quite possibly the worst interview ever conducted in the magazine with Lewis Hamilton. That was utterly awful.

I'll write a more constructive critique a bit later but my feelings are mixed. I do think, overall, the magazine has moved forward (most particularly in terms of the content) but I think it has a long way to go yet. I still can't help but shake the feeling the writers think their readers are morons. That they cannot read long sentences, let alone long paragraphs. That really. Irritates. Me. It's lame.

The 'new look' is actually the worst bit of it all for me. I really don't like it at all. I got a copy of my missus' 'Hello' magazine and to be honest on a few pages you could be forgiven for getting the two magazines mixed up. What some people say is cool, I rather think lame, attention seeking and tacky. The 'bling' cover can be forgiven (I actually thought that was okay) but such garish design really takes away from the sophistication of the sport and indeed of _some_ of the writing. But I think most disappointingly it took away from one of my favourite parts of the magazine - the parade. The photos there should be the absolute draw, with the garish, try-hard design the text steals from that.

And you can probably guess what I think of the lame 'witty' captions.

Ex-Nuts dep editor is utterly hopeless imo. He's a career journalist writing (boringly) about motorsport. Not a motorsport fan writing about his passion. That he is, at best, a peripheral fan of the sport comes across so strongly it's hard to take him very seriously.

To me, it seems as if the magazine is trying to cater to too many markets. It lacks coherence, it lacks any sort of sophistication now, and if that Hans joker doesn't get a passion injection, it lacks a lot of soul too.

This is not a problem though because Bishop had destroyed much of these elements too. But at least there was a veneer of sophistication which has now been lost.

The general quality of the written work though, despite my above reservations has improved. I also think the ordering of the content has improved. The short, sweet opinionated content is at the back, the interviews and contemporary features at the front. You can easily flow from page to page at the front, and then take your time and cherry pick at the back. I think it's easier to read that way.

Generally speaking I think the magazine is trying to cater to everyone and as a whole publication loses out for it. It also means though that there is something everyone can find interesting (I loved the Ferrari steering wheel feature for example). But I think it's probably now a news-stand read rather than a purchase. Which is though a step forward from the complete ignore it was a few months ago.

I'm just frustrated, there isn't a mature contemporary F1 magazine for grownups, something that doesn't treat it's reader as if they have just finished reading Loaded magazine and are interested in some cars. Motorsport Magazine is probably the closest out there, and I subscribe to that. It's a shame there isn't anything, yet, to rival that magazine for the F1 we watch every weekend.


I was super-sceptical of Hans on hearing of his past, but ironically I have found this issue to be the best in years and it turns out a great deal of the articles/interviews in this months mag are actually by Hans himself.

Maybe F1 Racing had somehow gotten too close and lost sight of what it was all about. Maybe somebody from the outside was needed to inject something fresh into the mag?

For the record though F1 Racing is still in a probationary period for me. One swallow does not make a summer, so if the next issue goes back to the recent shitness the magazine has displayed I'll still have zero hesitation in getting on the phone to cancel my sub.

#156 Mat

Mat
  • Member

  • 7,674 posts
  • Joined: January 99

Posted 19 June 2008 - 04:02

Originally posted by kar
I'm just frustrated, there isn't a mature contemporary F1 magazine for grownups, something that doesn't treat it's reader as if they have just finished reading Loaded magazine and are interested in some cars. Motorsport Magazine is probably the closest out there, and I subscribe to that. It's a shame there isn't anything, yet, to rival that magazine for the F1 we watch every weekend.


There is. Its called autosport.com

#157 kamix

kamix
  • Member

  • 1,238 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 June 2008 - 04:31

Originally posted by kar
I'm just frustrated, there isn't a mature contemporary F1 magazine for grownups, something that doesn't treat it's reader as if they have just finished reading Loaded magazine and are interested in some cars.


If F1Racing mag ever gets over this problem let me know and I will start reading it again. I haven't picked one up for about 4 years now because of this way of treating the reader as if they are brand new to F1 and motorsport. It's the same reason I hate James Allen (well one of them) - the way he explains what tyre warmers do every single race etc.

#158 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 19 June 2008 - 07:31

Originally posted by kar


I'm just frustrated, there isn't a mature contemporary F1 magazine for grownups, something that doesn't treat it's reader as if they have just finished reading Loaded magazine and are interested in some cars. Motorsport Magazine is probably the closest out there, and I subscribe to that. It's a shame there isn't anything, yet, to rival that magazine for the F1 we watch every weekend.


I agree with your sentiment, kar, but doubt it would sell well enough to justify it.

#159 bradleyl

bradleyl
  • Member

  • 188 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 19 June 2008 - 09:49

Thanks all, once again, for your feedback.

kar, I never fail to be amazed how much people can infer from knowing snippets of somebody's life/history. Having worked at Renault doesn't make me a pro-Renault fan for life. Just like working at Nuts doesn't pigeon-hole or characterise Hans in any way. It seems to be rather easy (not to mention unfounded) to hold against him the fact that he was a key part of one of the biggest publishing successes in the UK in recent years. Working for a magazine doesn't mean one embodies that magazine.

Passion and interest can be expressed in many different ways - it's not all about gritted-teeth, hardcore devotion. I love motor racing, but I love football, cricket, theatre, literature too. I don't understand how a value judgement about my passion for the sport can be made on that basis... just like I don't understand why Hans' previous job shapes his interest for motor sport.

I'm glad you like some of the changes, and I hope others will grow on you. We're not Motor Sport, and won't ever be - but equally, their approach wouldn't work in day-to-day F1. I'd just caution against inferring too much about people on the magazine from the very limited information you have about them.

Thanks to everybody for caring enough to send us your feedback though. The new issue is the sport of a process, not the end of it, and it will evolve month by month. I hope you feel that it continues to improve.

Advertisement

#160 tidytracks

tidytracks
  • Member

  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 19 June 2008 - 09:52

Also, IIRC, Seeberg used to write for Bernie's F1 mag, didn't he?

So he's got a past in motorsport, kar...

#161 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 19 June 2008 - 10:19

Originally posted by tidytracks
Also, IIRC, Seeberg used to write for Bernie's F1 mag, didn't he?

So he's got a past in motorsport, kar...


It is unfair to button-hole someone, this is true, but it's hard to avoid when someone so perfectly coheres to a stereotype. That I was being unfair doesn't change the absolute fact (for me anyway) that his (Seeburg's) efforts this month certainly came across as the written equivalent of a dial-tone. At least given that his Lewis Hamilton article was so awfully bad, it can only get better.

No magazine can please everyone, this is something one has to accept. I guess I want multiple pages of flowing, mature prose and maybe this magazine just isn't for relatively educated people over the age of 24. It just seems strange that the advertising is all geared up to appeal to professional people in the 24-45 bracket and the writing and stylistic choices are geared to people in the 15-24 one.

It's really easy to criticise though and we do not know the brief or the market within F1 Racing has to operate (probably a tough one given most people can get almost everything online so cheaply and the cost of printed publications are bordering on the ridiculous). It's pretty obvious the current magazine is taking a shotgun approach trying to appeal to as many groups as possible. And in some respects they have succeeded but generally speaking there's so much lightweight fluff on the internet, and plenty of pretty pictures too. Why would you pay nearly £5 a month for more of the same?

For me the answer is you wouldn't. You'd flick through it at the news stand. Motorsport assumes its readers are adults and writes accordingly, I don't understand how adopting a more mature approach would not work in contemporary F1? And I don't understand why sophistication has been exchanged for the brash and crass of the new design?

Anyway, I assume their marketing people know their audience far better than I do. I can only assume they reckon people have no attention span and need garish stimuli to draw them in. If so that's fine. But it's not for me, and time will tell if it's for anyone else either.

I want depth and authority that you seldom can get online. And there's no one in the print market that provides that and it's such a shame.

Originally posted by Mat


There is. Its called autosport.com


I'm a huge fan of what they've achieved here actually, especially given what appears to be very limited resources. But I want more :D

#162 potmotr

potmotr
  • Member

  • 9,999 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 19 June 2008 - 10:29

Originally posted by kar


That's good news. The systematic way Bishop lobotomised that magazine in his final couple years was a big reason I stopped buying it.


How long was Bishop the editor? I'd always thought he was there from issue one...

#163 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 19 June 2008 - 10:41

Originally posted by potmotr


How long was Bishop the editor? I'd always thought he was there from issue one...


Not too sure on that one. To be honest I started buying it in the mid 90s. The comment about the 'dumbing down' of the magazine was largely because I felt (like most people) the magazine became increasingly shrill and light weight (in literal, and figurative terms). Probably in reaction to dwindling sales which are affecting all print publications but particularly the ones catering to predominantly males.

While the current revamp is certainly a good step forward from the crippled publication Bishop left behind, like I said above, it still seems to much about SHOUTING and making 'impact' to grab your attention. It then tries to deliver its message as quickly as possible lest you get bored and move on.

It's not what I like, but I'm not sure what I like, and what people actually will buy are always the same thing :) And in that respect you have to defer to their market research people and assume they know what they are doing.

What is clear is their circulation has been dropping like a stone. In 2007 or something it was 42,575 for UK + Ireland. This is compared to 53,939 in 2005 and I'm not sure what it was in 2006, but probably not good. To lose nearly 20% of sales over 2 years is quite bad.

#164 bradleyl

bradleyl
  • Member

  • 188 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 19 June 2008 - 12:01

I think, kar, that I quite simply don't agree with your assessment of the tone and content of the magazine. It's not written like Motor Sport but as I've said, both style and also content dictate that - and I don't know if you fully appreciate or understand that fact. I won't be making any assumptions on that, either. But I don't think that it's written for 15 to 24 year olds either, to be honest - and I write that as somebody who's not in that bracket.

As for the tone and humour of the magazine, it reflects the fact that we don't feel the need to be po-faced and serious at all times about something that we enjoy... that's fun... and we're trying to get that across to the readers too. So no apologies for enjoying our jobs - we've got a fantastic privilege on behalf of our readers, and we try to do that justice. Perhaps it's not your cup of tea but as you said, there's no guarantee that your cup of tea is the one everybody likes...

The diversity of opinion on different features that has been seen even in this short thread shows that we are pressing a lot of the right buttons, and that different things appeal to different people. What I find unusual is that we seem so superlatively bad or good at some things in your assessment; it's all a little bit, well, extreme.

For info, your circulation data seems a little off base. Last ABC total net circulation was 64,405 for F1 Racing.

Thanks guys, I'd best go do some interviews now...

#165 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 19 June 2008 - 12:57

Originally posted by bradleyl
Perhaps it's not your cup of tea but as you said, there's no guarantee that your cup of tea is the one everybody likes...


This is absolutely true. And really only time and the ABC will tell who's right.

The diversity of opinion on different features that has been seen even in this short thread shows that we are pressing a lot of the right buttons, and that different things appeal to different people. What I find unusual is that we seem so superlatively bad or good at some things in your assessment; it's all a little bit, well, extreme.



I think the diversity of opinions comes from the fact you're pushing so many buttons you're bound to push one or two right for everyone. And that was always my point really, that the magazine is trying to cater a little bit to everyone. Which is fair enough. But that always comes at the expense of depth, that's just a fact of life though.

As for the polarised nature of my comments, I really hate the design, I mean _really_ don't like it. I really do detest the way the media in general is becoming more shrill, sacrificing sophistication for impact. I think it really does treat the reader as some kind of moron. But then I can accept that maybe that's just an artefact of modern society where there is so much information and so little time to consume it all. You have to make your point quickly, or many people wont care.

And the Seeburg interview, can you say with a straight face that that is going to go down as one of F1 Racing's 'highpoints'? Honestly, can you say you're very happy with it? You don't have to answer, I think as someone who comes across as a 'hardcore' F1 fan yourself, if you filter out any cognitive dissonance, you'll probably see where I'm coming from. Maybe not agree, that's fine, but I hope you can see why I think it was so awful from my perspective.

But, also, to be clear, I do think in many regards what you guys have managed represents a big step forward. I just think the writing can improve even more. The layout and peripheral stylistic things really are at the end of the day irrelevant. The content is king really. And in this regard I just can't bring myself to spend ~ £5,00 to have someone. Try. To. Be. Cool. It's not cool, it's moronic. Have fun, by all means. Have screaming headlines and shouting pullouts. But in the articles themselves dial-down the faux-cool. Try less to appear cool, or 'hip' or whatever. And just tell it as it is as if you were talking to a mate. If you spoke in 4 word sentences down the pub someone would give you a smack on the beak. It's not polite at all. It just comes across as if you're taking the piss out of them.

For info, your circulation data seems a little off base. Last ABC total net circulation was 64,405 for F1 Racing. [/B]


That's total circulation, I only had the definitive UK+Ireland figure for 2005 (don't have historical login to ABC :)) so it didn't make sense comparing that to the overall worldwide figure for 2007. I compared apples to apples.

From what I have read though, but can't trust the source, world wide figures in 2005 were over 85000, and that's fallen also to 64,000. So the overall decline in sales is not limited to just the British Isles. I quote these figures only really to qualify that I understand to a degree why some of the editorial decisions are being made.

#166 Beedeeai

Beedeeai
  • Member

  • 647 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 19 June 2008 - 14:45

Clearly the choice of editor was deliberate. The magazine went for someone whose previous post was at a lad's magazine rather than a motorsport publication. The management probably felt the need for change. Presumably the alternatives would have been writers like David Tremayne, Tom Clarkson and Maurice Hamilton - all people who would have come to the table brimming with motorsport writing experience and well-known for it globally.

However, we must not forget that hiring someone with comparatively little reputation as a motorsport writer was what the management wanted to do and so was clearly strategic. F1 Racing is read by tens of thousands of people who will not all be die-hard petrolheads so it presumably has to appeal to the general market. Someone who comes from a lad's magazine certainly should be skilled at doing that.

#167 tidytracks

tidytracks
  • Member

  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 19 June 2008 - 15:33

Originally posted by Beedeeai
Clearly the choice of editor was deliberate. The magazine went for someone whose previous post was at a lad's magazine rather than a motorsport publication. The management probably felt the need for change. Presumably the alternatives would have been writers like David Tremayne, Tom Clarkson and Maurice Hamilton - all people who would have come to the table brimming with motorsport writing experience and well-known for it globally.

However, we must not forget that hiring someone with comparatively little reputation as a motorsport writer was what the management wanted to do and so was clearly strategic. F1 Racing is read by tens of thousands of people who will not all be die-hard petrolheads so it presumably has to appeal to the general market. Someone who comes from a lad's magazine certainly should be skilled at doing that.


Or to take that line of argument to conclusion, maybe the "lads mag" angle has little to do with it...

I believe I'm right in saying Seeberg took the helm at Nuts when Zoo was the biggest (if not only) weekly lads mag in the UK. While he headed it up, Seeberg made Nuts the biggest weekly lads mag in Britain. I think the timelines certainly match in that respect.

So maybe F1R simply wanted a guy who knew how to make a great mag, and one which sold incredibly well.

On first impression, the new look F1Racing should certainly appeal to more people, perhaps giving the fans brought into the sport by the Hamilton effect something they can enjoy and digest without being bowled over or bored by science or politics.

#168 potmotr

potmotr
  • Member

  • 9,999 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 19 June 2008 - 16:15

Originally posted by kar


Have fun, by all means. Have screaming headlines and shouting pullouts. But in the articles themselves dial-down the faux-cool. Try less to appear cool, or 'hip' or whatever. And just tell it as it is as if you were talking to a mate. If you spoke in 4 word sentences down the pub someone would give you a smack on the beak. It's not polite at all. It just comes across as if you're taking the piss out of them.


Kar, serious question: Have you ever worked in the media?

#169 Imperial

Imperial
  • Member

  • 2,715 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 19 June 2008 - 16:30

Originally posted by kar
his Lewis Hamilton article was so awfully bad, it can only get better.


To make a fair point on that...

Have you read any other interviews with Lewis? They're all shit. I therefore don't blame F1 Racing on that score. I did however happen to think it gave a reasonable insight into how little true access people can get to Lewis and the kind of responses they get from him when they do. Perhaps the article was billed incorrectly a little. I don't have the mag in front of me but IIRC it was billed almost as a day in the life expose, or a huge insight into Hamilton World. The result was somewhat different, but no less interesting. I think it exposed the no-doubt tedious life of a Mac driver away from the racetrack (when doing sponsor commitments. I wouldn't class poncing around Geneva on your day off as tedious, unless it's the constant scraping off of dogshit from your shoe that is!).

Bradley may or may not choose to confirm or deny this, but I highly suspect that anyone who wishes to interview Lewis (or Heikki for that matter) has to have their questions screened beforehand, maybe even suggestions for questions are made, and no doubt a press-officer is sat in on the entire interview. I have other reasons for this suspicion, but one I can expand on is because I read another Lewis interview today in a magazine I found on a canteen (mag name forgotten) and the questions were similar to F1 Racing's questions, whilst Lewis's answers were almost word for word the same. He clearly has been programmed to reel off the same speil time after time.

Put blunty, we're never going to get a decent Lewis interview until either the day he changes teams (will probably never happen) or after he retires.

I can't fault magazines for the limited access they get with drivers. Such a shame really that the teams and sponsors can't see the value of allowing their drivers to speak freely. Kudos to Red Bulland Mark Webber however!


#170 Beedeeai

Beedeeai
  • Member

  • 647 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 19 June 2008 - 16:49

So maybe F1R simply wanted a guy who knew how to make a great mag, and one which sold incredibly well.


I agree and this is exactly what it needed! It seems they went for someone because of his knowledge of making good magazines (though Seeberg didn't run Nuts did he?) not his motorsport knowledge. Provided that the magazine continues to be supported by heavyweight experts whilst Seeberg learns the ropes there's no reason why quality should slip. Quite the opposite.

In fact, I often wonder whether some F1 journalists are more interested in F1 and travelling to the races than journalism.

#171 potmotr

potmotr
  • Member

  • 9,999 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 19 June 2008 - 23:32

Originally posted by Beedeeai
In fact, I often wonder whether some F1 journalists are more interested in F1 and travelling to the races than journalism.


It's funny, even when you are covering something you really love, the act of travelling on planes, then in cars and into hotels, then working to tight deadlines after and hussling interviews after your sport has finished can make something you enjoy seem like a job real quick...

#172 Beedeeai

Beedeeai
  • Member

  • 647 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 20 June 2008 - 19:53

That's what common sense would say but you wouldn't think it when reading the sanctimonious claptrap in some stories I've seen on a certain other website preaching about how covering motorsport gives an education in business, politics, global crises etc....

In my opinion, the problem with F1 Racing is that it has become a victim of its own success. By being one of the world's most widely read F1 mags, it has to cater for a broad audience. That alone is probably why they got in an editor with a tabloid background rather than a motorsport specialist. It sounds sensible to me since it clearly means that he's good at his job which is making magazines which lots of people buy. However, bearing this in mind, it's a little unrealistic to assume that the magazine is out to cater for an audience of enthusiasts - it mirrors F1 itself as the majority of its hundreds of millions of viewers are not enthusiasts.

Nevertheless, the relaunch surpassed my expectations and I suspect that as Seeberg gets more used to the sport it's only going to improve.

#173 estoril85

estoril85
  • Member

  • 1,376 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 21 June 2008 - 09:45

BradleyL - In an earlier post I stated my opinion that recent issues have been shit! The latest issue is a major step in the right direction, well laid out, good use of typeface only 50% there yet but 50% better than recent issues, I will repeat my request for more on the technical side though, as per the excellent articles that used to appear in F1 magazine (my tuppence worth :))

#174 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,206 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 21 June 2008 - 13:12

News to me that Bernie Ecclestone qualified for the British GP 1958. That was indeed a fiendishly difficult quiz.

#175 smartie_f1

smartie_f1
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 21 June 2008 - 17:43

I've been a long-time subscriber to F1 Racing. When it used to arrive I'd race for the post and i'd sit for a good couple of hours reading it from cover to cover straight away, nothing was more important. Then it'd sit there a day or before i read it. Clearing out my cupboards yesterday i found the only issue i'd opened from the packet and read this year was the Monaco issue - and that was only because i'd taken it to Monaco to read on the plane.

So I was quite looking forward to a 'relaunched' magazine this month. I sat down to read it last night. And my thought most of the way through this was '"i'm not really keen on this". The Mark Webber interview was good and the feature on the McLaren Technology centre was amazing and for me, definitely the best thing in the mag. Other than that, i felt quite disappointed. I also like the feature on the the drivers' parade. Ok, it was given a fluffy approach, but its another behind the scenes look at the stuff the fans never get to see.

the 'pitlane heros' section was good. I had wondered who painted them - so that sort of 'behind the scenes' look is interesting. Stuff like how much does a litre of F1 fuel cost? and little known facts are appealing. ITV did a segment in 2006 i think where they looked at how long it took to pack up (renault? redbull?) from Germany and transport it to Hungary and set it up again. That sort of stuff is interesting.

I was very disappointed by Murray's 'column'. Eddie's sharper wit is definitely more my cup of tea.

Also, don't if this is different from usual (not having read previous issues this year) but there seemed a high proportion of adverts in it.

Ultimately, i suppose, I look to see the other side of F1 vicariously through F1 Racing magazine. That means i want to see features on what goes on in the garages, in the paddock, in the factories and in the meetings. Stuff that fans very very rarely get an opportunity to glimpse for themselves. I don't really want to read about Ricardo Patrese showjumping, or Jackie Stewart doing a book tour (or whatever, i didn't read the feature).

I don't have the contacts to get in the garages and the factories myself. I am not able to talk to the mechanics/support staff about how it is from their point of view and thats the stuff I want to know.

What i don't want is a 'celebrity' style gossip magazine that gives a lot of style but no substence.

So, the upshot it, i'll probably remain a subscriber, out of habit and i might open the plastic if one of the shout lines attract my attention.

#176 Steve Williams

Steve Williams
  • Member

  • 1,227 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 22 June 2008 - 10:24

Originally posted by Eau Red
Magazines in general have been hurt by the internet. We pick up a copy of F1 Racing having already watched the race on TV, followed the live timing on the F1 website, read Craig's technical analysis, the race analysis, the weekly grapevine, Ed Gormon's MaxBlog, and browsed a hundred photos of the latest hole in the Ferrari's nose. So the magazine needs to offer something different.

I've seen other magazines adapt successfully to this "new era," and others try things that didn't work out. I think Velo News (a US cycling magazine.) provides a good model. They've shortened their coverage of race details & focused on more in-depth analyses of a specific aspect of a race or a team or a rider. They've expanded their technical coverage. And they've increased their number of historical articles. It's enough that I've kept subscribing, even though I have access to every cycling website out there, & I pick up my issue of Velo News already knowing the results of every recent race. Time Magazine, between the changes they've made to their website & their magazine content, has also done a good job at adapting recently, after nearly going out of business due to their failure to change with the times.

So I'd suggest to F1 Racing that their focus might shift more towards historical articles (interviews with ex-drivers, ex-team owners, reviews of classic races) or technical articles (not engineering-school level, but maybe something like, what's the deal with this J-damper thing, or what is it about Lewis' driving that makes him kill his front tires in Turkey every year). A magazine can also do a better job at presenting graphics & photos than the internet can. I think magazines in general need to focus on what they can offer that's different or better than what we can already get on the internet.

As for the Max scandal, I understand the point that the magazine couldn't keep up with breaking news, at least at first; but it's such a huge story in the world of F1 that it really needs to be dealt with by any serious publication.


I think this is 100% right. Even though we have all done the web do death by the time the print magazine is out, the model of what Velo News is doing is absolutely the right way to go. Coz there is always the time for a coffee and read a mag, or on the train or similar. And there is some stuff a magazine just does better for the web. I know that F1 racing gets a bit wanky highschool People magazine style at times, but some of it is actually interesting. And a good escape from day to day life.

Also being at the povo end of the foodchain in Australia, we don't get the 'new improved' on till July 2 so I haven't seen what it looks like. But I hope they include the Hamilton interview in the Aus version as it sounds like a great amount of unintentional funnyness due to how bad it was. Thie may be interesting. Or awful. Or both.

#177 dank

dank
  • Member

  • 5,191 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:31

Hey Bradley, you get about a bit don't you? Just been listening to you on the Radio 5 Chequered Flag podcast. Good work!

#178 Mat Rempit

Mat Rempit
  • Member

  • 176 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 27 June 2008 - 23:59

I had stopped the subscription of F1 Racing Magazine since early 2008.

Reason?? - Matt Bishop and all the writers placed Lewis Hamilton at the altar of GOD,...that it became totally unreadable....
every issue has the face of Lewis on the coverpage.....
and in every race analysis,..there is some talk about Lewis Hamilton's god like ability in cornering,...friction circle theory by Windsor.

It is totally unbearable, to the point i had stopped buying F1 Racing.



Anyone else did the same?

#179 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 6,997 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 28 June 2008 - 00:14

Good for you, Mat.

I´ll renew my subscription for another two years in August. No because of their Hamilton worship, but because of the historic footage and foto material they put in again and again. Talk about trying to make everyone happy.
The 60´s, 70´s and 80´s had some classic racing which you just don´t find nowadays anymore - just watch some season reviews from those decades.
The sport went into a decline all the way since Senna left the body.

Anyway, regarding Peter Windsor, this guy is hopeless. It is unbelievable how he just KNOWS what a given driver has been thinking or doing in a given second in the cockpit. I sincerely believe that Windsor is not a journalist but must be a seer with his third eye open. How else would he know all these things.;)

Hamilton on the cover - despicable. They milk the cow as long as they still can.

I wonder if their new look will bring F1 Racing any luck. I find the extensive use of Impact (typefont) a clear step down in class, speaking from a designers point of view.

Advertisement

#180 kamix

kamix
  • Member

  • 1,238 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 28 June 2008 - 00:20

I stopped my subscriptions when they shifted target audience from well learned F1 fans to random joe on the street. So, about 5 or more years ago.

#181 F1Fanatic.co.uk

F1Fanatic.co.uk
  • Member

  • 1,725 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:15

Originally posted by Mat Rempit
I had stopped the subscription of F1 Racing Magazine since early 2008.

Reason?? - Matt Bishop and all the writers placed Lewis Hamilton at the altar of GOD,...that it became totally unreadable....

Matt Bishop hasn't edited the magazine for months.

#182 Andy Donovan

Andy Donovan
  • Member

  • 1,015 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:23

Originally posted by aditya-now
I´ll renew my subscription for another two years in August. No because of their Hamilton worship, but because of the historic footage and foto material they put in again and again. Talk about trying to make everyone happy.
The 60´s, 70´s and 80´s had some classic racing which you just don´t find nowadays anymore - just watch some season reviews from those decades.
The sport went into a decline all the way since Senna left the body.

If you're interested in historic stuff, why not switch to MotorSport, which has a lot more of that stuff? I swapped my F1Racing subscription last year, and I've not looked back - MotorSport's 'da bomb' in my opinion.

#183 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,183 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:34

How long has MotorSport been going for?

#184 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,077 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:41

Longer than the sport of "Formula 1" actually.

#185 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:49

Motorsport for Louisa Skipper ... completely shallow and irrelevant reason, but as good as any other :-)

http://www.motorspor...uthor/lskipper/

:)

#186 D82

D82
  • Member

  • 1,391 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:54

I haven't bought F1 Racing for several years and I'm not missing it. It always had great photography that made one think why they weren't giving them as posters. But suddenly I realised I wasn't reading the articles as I used to. Now I think autosport.com is enough for coverage and articles - besides it has great photography too.

I would like to buy MotorSport too if I could find it here in Turkey...

#187 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:57

I don't particularly like the political polemic that has pervaded Motorsport since Roebuck and Smith took over proceedings but you can't fault the writing itself. It's very pleasant (and grown up) to read.

#188 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,077 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:58

Originally posted by kar
Motorsport for Louisa Skipper ... completely shallow and irrelevant reason, but as good as any other :-)

http://www.motorspor...uthor/lskipper/

:)


Aren't you usually complaining F1 Racing is aimed too much at un-involved fans and lacks critical thinking? And then you go and focus on that nonsense?

#189 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 08:59

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld


Aren't you usually complaining F1 Racing is aimed too much at un-involved fans and lacks critical thinking? And then you go and focus on that nonsense?


I was being glib ... see above :-)

#190 Tomecek

Tomecek
  • Member

  • 6,088 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 28 June 2008 - 09:11

Originally posted by Mat Rempit
...friction circle theory by Windsor.


:cool:

I learned recently that Windsor is the guy questioning drivers at TV press conference. I also heard some stories about him.

He is actually quite respected among drivers and felow journalists, but I also know that he wants to be always different and that many times he is quite arogant to the others just because he thinks he is someone else.

That's also why his dull articles about each driver's driving style and personality analysis after 30 seconds they met. I simply believe these articles are sort of trance becauce without telemetry data available to you after each grand prix it's simply impossible to provide such detailed analysis. Let alone that you also party drive according to what car will allow you...

Anyhow, F1 Racing is strange magazine, its target group are usualy people which doesn't know much about F1 (I mean they want to attract as many people as possible, therefore you cannot write articles in F1-die-hard-fan language).

And they will also introduce completely new cover and design after many people left.

#191 AFCA

AFCA
  • Member

  • 6,661 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 09:15

Is that still a monthly magazine ?

#192 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 09:18

Isn't there another thread where Bradley gave his best efforts to defend the publication?

#193 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 09:35

On the second page

http://forums.autosp...309#post3189309

#194 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 09:40

Originally posted by kar
On the second page

http://forums.autosp...309#post3189309


I thought there was -I would hate to think poor Bradley would have to go through it all again....

For the record, I don't read it; it's not aimed at me.

**Wow - time travel exists - we're in said thread!

#195 Bumper

Bumper
  • RC Forum Host

  • 1,966 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 28 June 2008 - 09:42

:)

#196 blackhand2010

blackhand2010
  • Member

  • 281 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 28 June 2008 - 11:00

I've bought the "..new and improved..." version, and whilst it's better than it was it still has a way to go.
I always liked the articles where they looked at F1 from a different slant. I remember an article where they sent Brian Sewell to a BAR launch to comment on the style and design. Even though it was Sewell, it was a really good article.
Though it would never happen, I'd like to see non-motorsports related journalists, who are famous in a different field, who perhaps have a personal passion for F1/motorsports, employed for one off articles.
Clive James (who did a T.V documentary about one of the Vegas Grand Prix's), looking at how things have changed since that documentary; P.J O'Rourke doing one on F1 from an American point of view.
I'm sure there could be others.
It's a pipe dream I know, but I think it would make good copy.

#197 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 28 June 2008 - 18:06

Originally posted by D.M.N.
How long has MotorSport been going for?


Since 1924....

#198 Jodum5

Jodum5
  • Member

  • 1,247 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 29 June 2008 - 23:39

Originally posted by blackhand2010

Though it would never happen, I'd like to see non-motorsports related journalists, who are famous in a different field, who perhaps have a personal passion for F1/motorsports, employed for one off articles.
[/B]

I think you're on to something. Perhaps Bill O'Reilly could do the TV unilaterals as a one off...

#199 dank

dank
  • Member

  • 5,191 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 04 December 2008 - 22:48

I've heard that Haymarket is making some redundancies, in particular F1 Racing reducing the number of writers/contributors? I would name names, but I think it would be unfair to at the moment.

Advertisement

#200 Ocelot

Ocelot
  • Member

  • 681 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 04 December 2008 - 22:50

I've heard that Haymarket is making some redundancies, in particular F1 Racing reducing the number of writers/contributors? I would name names, but I think it would be unfair to at the moment.


Maybe there has been a decline in sales since the bloke new to F1 took over?