457 replies to this topic

[YellowHelmet]

Looking at nowadays journalism in F1, i find it hard to find objective racing commentators.
Very often they act like lobbyists and not like journalists.
I dont have the opportunity to watch the formula1 coverage from britain (just sometimes the replay over a stream in the net), but the german-speaking commentators (exception ORF) are horrible and so the experts are.
It is impossible to watch a race with joy if you are not a fan of Vettel or Schumacher (they call it formula germany). They even dont show the other guys from press conference, just vettel etc.

I would like to have a discussion about the differences between lobbyism and journalism and about examples for journalists who dont act/write like lobbyists.
To have somekind of a flipchart with people who should be called (objective) journalists or lobbyists regarding formula1.
Lobbyists could do lobbying work for national, drivers, constructors or any other interests, while objective journalists dont care about such interests and are trying to give us a picture of what is happening without lobbying interests.
In Austria you could call the Co-Commentator of ORF Wurz an objective person (he is not really a journalist, but does work for ORF as a commentator)
the total opposite of him is Lauda, who is a lobbyist par exellence.
In german-speaking formula1-newspapers i havent found a really objective journalist yet, but maybe someone can add a person, who he/she thinks is an objective journalist.

And it would be nice, if other persons from other countries can add persons to a list of objective journalists and vice versa lobbyists.

Edited by YellowHelmet, 30 March 2011 - 17:09.

[Unbiased]

As someone who has been in the paddock for 9 years now, 8-12 races a season for my job, I would say there are no real journalists in F1.

Many of them are close friends with drivers, different people within the team etc. Some of them fly together, eat together, go out partying together (all nothing to do with PR events) and on TV they put up this act like there is some kind of distance and professionalism.

Drivers know how important it is to have these 'journalists' and commentators as friends, because they can be useful in certain times. Webber proved that last year, the way he used his buddies in the English speaking media (which are a lot) to try and bend RBR to his ways. Which failed in the end btw.

It depends of course what side of the fence you are, the way you judge these people. If you do not like Vettel, don't watch the German ones (who are very friendly with him off cam). If you do not like Webber or Button, do not watch the BBC (who are very friendly with them off cam, in fact DC, Webber, Button, Brundle are like a group of musketeers, always together, best friends).

[r4mses]

Have to agree. German TV coverage of F1 is horrible most of the time. Though RTL is still better than Sky - why on earth does someone pay a s*load of money to watch and HEAR those guys at Sky?!

As you say, they're very much focused on German drivers... however I think that's down to the demand of the major part of the audience. Furthermore I think they (RTL foremost) try hard to get Vettel in a position similar to MSC mid 90s/early 2000s when their viewing figures were (allegedly) insane. Quite logical from their point of view, after all it's about money.

[Sakae]

As someone who has been in the paddock for 9 years now, 8-12 races a season for my job, I would say there are no real journalists in F1.

I like you.

Who are you again?

[Tardis40]

I know what you are saying, but there's another side to it.

The German feed I would assume goes primarily to Germans. The audience is German and the majority of them are interested in the German F1 team. The announcers are catering to their audience. You don't stay employed as an announcer if you don't know who your audience is.

I got this from a pretty good sportswriter/radio show host/sports news anchor. (not F1) He was known for being honest and he wasn't afraid to say it straight out. His sports radio show was heavily slanted in the direction of a particular team because the people listening to it were staunch fans of that team, and not because he thought it was great journalism. Whatever he brought out about that team accentuated the positive and downplayed the negative. But even he had to laugh occasionally at some of the phone calls he would get from listeners.

Regarding announcers, I can only talk about the English speaking ones. I like Brundle, but I liked him better as a side man instead of the main attraction. He has a quick mind and he usually gets it right. I like David Hobbs for different reasons, mostly because he keeps you entertained.

[Amphicar]

"You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
the motor racing journalist.
But, seeing what the man will do
unbribed, there's no occasion to."

(with apologies to Humbert Wolfe)

[topical]

Have to agree. German TV coverage of F1 is horrible most of the time. Though RTL is still better than Sky - why on earth does someone pay a s*load of money to watch and HEAR those guys at Sky?!

I don't believe that Sky could have more advertising than RTL. I watched last week's race and of the 90 minutes or so duration I think at least 20 minutes of in-race time were advertising. It's really awful, especially when live timing was down as well.

The RTL commentators are also just about the most openly biased I've heard. The only thing comparable was ITV in Hamilton's first year in F1, but even they cooled off a bit on the bias after that. RLT on the other hand just seem to get worse. As an Alonso fan I find it particularly annoying as he is pretty much their hate figure No.1.

[Thunderpants]

Why would motor sport journalists be any different from ANY other journalist?

[D.M.N.]

Motor sport journalists are just like any other journalist. I'm sure a 'pro Vettel' journalist has had to write a article not exactly favourable towards him before, in the same way a UK political journalist may have written an article which may support the Tory policies when he is deep inside a Labour voter.

[Tsarwash]

I have to add that the BBC seem to focus on Vettel an awful lot too, as he seems to be the most promising talent out there currently. Obviously the Beeb are going to focus on Lewis and Jensen and Paul more than the others. It's not too bad, although I really would have liked to see more coverage of Perez and Maldonaldo. I would imagine that both Eddie and Martin have made plenty of friends and enemies over the last thirty years and it would be difficult to overcome these relationships.

[primer]

I think there is pressure on media to attract as much web traffic as they can, and writing boring, unbiased, factual news reports (as AtlasF1 of old attempted to do, oh how the times have changed) does not get enough traffic anymore.

However, if you write a somewhat editioralized or biased news, you get a lot of traffic not only from people who find their opinions reaffirmed by the said article, but also those who feel challenged by it. This must be tempting for both the reporter and the editor, both want their article to be read by tens of thousands and not a few hundred people.

Also, since most fans are narrow-minded imbeciles and root for drivers based on nationality or some such preference, by writing articles that please these fans you can at least lock this viewership to your portal/service, screw integrity. So the mass of fans is just as responsible for the decline in news standards.

As for lobbying, motorsport media has always allowed itself to be used by driver's agents/managers. It has become so blatant lately....they do not even try to hide it any more. I guess this is the 'fees' the media has to pay for exclusive access and interviews with popular drivers. You rub my back I rub yours kinda deal.

Edited by primer, 30 March 2011 - 18:31.

[Sakae]

I am appauled how any consultant to a driver (like to DC in his time) can remain unbias with his reporting on the race. BBC is transmitted in a lot of countries, and any inaccuracy, slant or a work out of context stick with fans as a "fact". I am hoping that Michael will write a story about it one day. ITV literally a few seconds into an event declared (implied?), that Schumacher parked car deliberately in Monaco, thus setting whole chain of hateful campain after that.

I do not know whether he did this deliberately, or his car simply gave up, but point is, IT commentators without investigation could not know that either, yet it did not stop them to pass the judgement.

[P123]

that Schumacher parked car deliberately in Monaco, thus setting whole chain of hateful campain after that.

Because nobody else had that thought until ITV pointed it out.

[Sakae]

We are going OT, but isn't on the tube whole range of crime/police shows, in which they demonstrating forensic investigation before judgement is rendered? So, you may have an idea what effort is exerted in search of the truth. I haven't however detected that ITV was investigating anything or anyone, nor having acceess to team's data, thus - what gives? They were speculating; nothing wrong with that behind the scenes, but to go on the air with that? That crossess the line.

[Villes Gilleneuve]

As someone who has been in the paddock for 9 years now, 8-12 races a season for my job, I would say there are no real journalists in F1.

There's a reason for that. If you start writing objectively and critically about the sport, you will get shut out.

Senna did this to his friend and he never worked again in journalism.

Nigel Roebuck is still able to call sh8t from shinola in f1.

God forbid a journalist states as educated opinion.

But this isn't a complaint of just F1 journalists, journalism in general is dead.

[Villes Gilleneuve]

I am appauled how any consultant to a driver (like to DC in his time) can remain unbias with his reporting on the race. BBC is transmitted in a lot of countries, and any inaccuracy, slant or a work out of context stick with fans as a "fact". I am hoping that Michael will write a story about it one day. ITV literally a few seconds into an event declared (implied?), that Schumacher parked car deliberately in Monaco, thus setting whole chain of hateful campain after that.

Seriously?

Herr Schumacher has a long history of cheating.

You don't want "unbiased" anything in the press, you want informed opinion and facts, then use critical thinking to decide what you think is right.

The idea that TV somehow has a truth filter is why governments can go to war based on lies with full public support.

[Sakae]

I have noticed that there are two guys behind a microphone. One can report facts, and we shall call him a journalist. The other one, maybe DC this year, will complement journalist who expressess an educated opinion, and we call him an editor. It's not as complicated, and we would know how to interpret context in which either are speaking.

Edited by Sakae, 30 March 2011 - 22:41.

[AlexS]

Does not exists that thing called unbiased journalism.

[ClubmanGT]

I can't take Brundle seriously after hearing him insist that McLaren had done nothing wrong during Spygate and that everyone else apparently had details about other cars' weight distribution and their drivers openly discussing other team's data being applied to the simulator.

[Bloggsworth]

Lobbying is when you have an axe to grind in furtherance of your bank balance, journalism is when in the furtherance of your bank balance you grind an axe...

[BRG]

Any sports journalist (be it in football, baseball, skiing, motorsport or whatever) will tend to be an enthusiast for that sport, and probably a competitor at one time. As they are only human beings, how then will they not have an opinion about the sport? To ask for an unbiased enthusiast is to ask for the Moon. They don't exist.

[404KF2]

I don't mind the supposedly bad commentating (Canada gets the BBC on TSN, but we can also watch Hobbs etc on Speed - though they're obviously not at the races).

I am capable of watching a show and making my own mind up about what is happening without needing the opinion of a commentator to validate my own thoughts. Brundlefly and The Chin seem OK enough as commentator and colour man.

I think though that the original poster was maybe referring to bad editing and general coverage of events (for example, not showing driver interviews post-race, other than the German ones), well that would be a different matter and would infuriate me if I was really into F-1 (which I am not).

[Arska]

If we go back in history, Ben Edwards and John Watson on Eurosport during 90s. Not only were they the best F1 commentator pairing I've ever enjoyed, I also felt they were the most impartial - and I think the thread starter equals that with journalism.

[BullHead]

To be paid, and to have access as a 'proper' journalist I would imagine is nigh on impossible though.

[Villes Gilleneuve]

I don't mind the supposedly bad commentating (Canada gets the BBC on TSN, but we can also watch Hobbs etc on Speed - though they're obviously not at the races).

Hobbs needs to quit. He mumbles incessantly. He often gets it wrong on race events.
The ITV commentary is 1000% better than SPEED.

Count how many times in a race Matchett has to mention the good old days at Benneton. Shut up Steve.


Check this out, video recap by the guys at that other magazine:

http://www.motorspor...sport-30032011/

Edited by Villes Gilleneuve, 30 March 2011 - 19:59.

[PretentiousBread]

It depends of course what side of the fence you are, the way you judge these people. If you do not like Vettel, don't watch the German ones (who are very friendly with him off cam). If you do not like Webber or Button, do not watch the BBC (who are very friendly with them off cam, in fact DC, Webber, Button, Brundle are like a group of musketeers, always together, best friends).

Funny, this pretty much confirms what I always thought about the BBC's slightly illogical Button centricity in their coverage. I understand that people are attracted to Button because of his easy going, likeable personality and that he's a star who is also 'down to earth' - probably the same reason Britain is obsessed with the moderately talented bore that is Cheryl Cole - but this shouldn't extend into analysis of how good he is or isn't. It's pretty clear that he isn't the same level as Hamilton - yes he is on occasion, just like DC was occasionally the same level as Hakkinen - and yet the BBC would have the casual fan believing that they're pretty much equal.

In fairness to Brundle though, I know he doesn't personally rank Button in the same league as Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel or Kubica. Unless you knew better though you'd assume he did with the way the BBC coverage seems to operate.

Apologies if this has gone slightly off topic, just wanted to get that one off my chest.

Edited by PretentiousBread, 30 March 2011 - 20:41.

[Villes Gilleneuve]

Funny, this pretty much confirms what I always thought about the BBC's slightly illogical Button centricity in their coverage.

It's a British network. They would get crucified if they didn't highlight the brits.
He did win a WDC.

[r4mses]

Talking about biased journalist: Thinking about it, I might pay a few bucks to listen to one race live comment of Joe Saward with Liuzzi in the race. God, that might be entertaining ...until you might get a little bit annoyed ;)

[Ross Stonefeld]

That's not what they're talking about, but the idea that Button gets more 'love' than his performances against Hamilton(you know, a British superstar) would warrant.

[PretentiousBread]

It's a British network. They would get crucified if they didn't highlight the brits.
He did win a WDC.

Of course, the point I was making wasn't that they're favouring him because he's British - that's fair enough, par for the course - but that to an extent they almost overlook Hamilton. Sometimes I almost forget Hamilton is British watching the BBC. In fact, their treatment of Hamilton is actually quite decent in that it's fairly objective, and this would be great if it wasn't for the fact that Button get's slobbered over the whole time instead.

Edited by PretentiousBread, 30 March 2011 - 21:00.

[pRy]

Motor sport journalists are just like any other journalist. I'm sure a 'pro Vettel' journalist has had to write a article not exactly favourable towards him before, in the same way a UK political journalist may have written an article which may support the Tory policies when he is deep inside a Labour voter.

I suppose in some ways the F1 Paddock is rather like Parliament. It's one central environment where the journalists mingle and work. They all know each other etc.

[jjcale]

There's a reason for that. If you start writing objectively and critically about the sport, you will get shut out.

Senna did this to his friend and he never worked again in journalism.

Nigel Roebuck is still able to call sh8t from shinola in f1.

God forbid a journalist states as educated opinion.

But this isn't a complaint of just F1 journalists, journalism in general is dead.

This.

[One]

demagog, lobby, facts reporting does not belong to one chank.

- demagog is what some of us will do in forum or in a bad media who wants shiny exposure. F1times is the case.
- lobby does happen with a bit o commercial eyes or critical eyes, or even love to the sport.
- facts reporting is as we may all know, yet undefined so far in formula one...

[flyer121]

You can spot bias in every person and thats probably natural. TV channels cater to their home audiences so its okay if they focus on Lewis in UK or Seb in Germany.

In the UK - 2 days before any GP - the headlines are Lewis this or Lewis that - even when Lewis was hardly competing for the title. What can you do? Majority of users want to read drivel about their own home country guys... pathetic but true.

What I find more sinister is someone like Brundle on his grid walks. The way he talks to Seb is completely different to the way he talks to Button for instance.
To Seb he looked almost like playing mind games about lack of Kers on the "long" run to turn 1 (seriously long? is he watching F1 for the first time? Aus has the shortest run to T1) and will he be able to defend and all. Seemed he is psyching him into a mistake at the start. Thankfully Seb is stronger than that mentally.

Then hilariously he talks about his pole lap and the mistakes he made on that lap. Really?? The guy blew the field with one of the largest margins and he is telling him he made a few mistakes?

Then when talking to Jenson , he is his sweet self and talking about how good the car felt etc and whether he can win? LOL Win??

Lewis doesn't even talk to Media before the start cos he is trying to focus, I wish Seb starts to do the same Or atleast avoid BBC.

Edited by flyer121, 31 March 2011 - 09:32.

[depailler on tyrrell p34]

here in Italy all the commentaries are for ferrari..only Tarquini's engineer Bruno and Ivan Capelli speaks without bias. The commentator here in Italy is a crap

translet with google my article about the f1 in tv here in italy if you want 8the translator say hair as Capelli)
http://motorsportran...e-da-melbourne/

Edited by depailler on tyrrell p34, 31 March 2011 - 09:37.

[YellowHelmet]

Thanks a lot for all the interesting posts.

I think that there are few topics on which we are discussing now.

1. reasons for such a coverage (as e.g. Tardis40, primer etc. said)

2. a personal clasification of TV-channels and their "journalists" into categories of lobbyists and (objective) journalists.

And i think both of them are very interesting, because they are linked.

There was a statement that journalists are somekind of related to the drivers and therefore use the TV-coverage not to commentate unbiased but biased towards certain drivers.
Thinking of it, i would like to know which journalists are linked to what drivers to make it easier for me to filter their informations.

What we have heard now (and i hope if there is anybody who thinks differently about it, this person will tell it) it can be summed up like this:
TV:
BBC favourises Button (Webber) coz Brundle/DC are linked to those drivers.
(are there other journalists from BBC who can be "classified"?)
(i know that a classification is hard to make, but let us start, who knows what will come out)

RTL (germany) favourises Vettel-Schumacher (and formula germany) coz of their "national" orientiated audience
Lauda is a lobbyist for Vettel and RBR
Wasser is a Vettel and Schumacher fanatic
Danner was once very objective turned "pop", that means became a lobbyist for german interests
König is the only one who is trying to bring some objectivity into the game

ORF (austria) although austrian do not favourise a team visibly. They are happy if RBR wins, but are not RBR-centred.
Wurz is somekind of a cool guy (who sometimes uses sexist language, but one can overlook that) who is really into F1 and praises every driver who is doing well in the race, doesnt matter if it is liuzzi or hamilton etc.
Hausleitner has a faible for Hamilton but still can distinguish between beeing biased and being unbiased

What about the other countries and their TV-channels?

f1-magazines/newspapers
motorsport-total.com (germany) very balanced journalism, coz they have "lobbyists" of all sorts (also some objective journalists) and so can present a somekind of objective picture of fromula 1
e.g. Stefan Ziegler very objective guy. Doesnt matter about whom is writing he is not trying to let a driver/team look deliberately good or bad. Good journalist (judging of that what i have read of him)
Christian Nimmervoll (chief editor) a lobbyist for german purposes, an alonso-basher

what about other f1-newspapers/magazines and their employees?



Why not use this thread to rate and review the coverages of f1 through the whole world after every race?

Edited by YellowHelmet, 31 March 2011 - 09:59.

[depailler on tyrrell p34]

Thanks a lot for all the interesting posts.

I think that there are few topics on which we are discussing now.

1. reasons for such a coverage (as e.g. Tardis40, primer etc. said)

2. a personal clasification of TV-channels and their "journalists" into categories of lobbyists and (objective) journalists.

And i think both of them are very interesting, because they are linked.

There was a statement that journalists are somekind of related to the drivers and therefore use the TV-coverage not to commentate unbiased but biased towards certain drivers.
Thinking of it, i would like to know which journalists are linked to what drivers to make it easier for me to filter their informations.

What we have heard now (and i hope if there is anybody who thinks differently about it, this person will tell it) it can be summed up like this:
TV:
BBC favourises Button (Webber) coz Brundle/DC are linked to those drivers.
(are there other journalists from BBC who can be "classified"?)
(i know that a classification is hard to make, but let us start, who knows what will come out)

RTL (germany) favourises Vettel-Schumacher (and formula germany) coz of their "national" orientiated audience
Lauda is a lobbyist for Vettel and RBR
Wasser is a Vettel and Schumacher fanatic
Danner was once very objective turned "pop", that means became a lobbyist for german interests
König is the only one who is trying to bring some objectivity into the game

ORF (austria) although austrian do not favourise a team visibly. They are happy if RBR wins, but are not RBR-centred.
Wurz is somekind of a cool guy (who sometimes uses sexist language, but one can overlook that) who is really into F1 and praises every driver who is doing well in the race, doesnt matter if it is liuzzi or hamilton etc.
Hausleitner has a faible for Hamilton but still can distinguish between beeing biased and being unbiased

What about the other countries and their TV-channels?

f1-magazines/newspapers
motorsport-total.com (germany) very balanced journalism, coz they have "lobbyists" of all sorts (also some objective journalists) and so can present a somekind of objective picture of fromula 1
e.g. Stefan Ziegler very objective guy. Doesnt matter about whom is writing he is not trying to let a driver/team look deliberately good or bad. Good journalist (judging of that what i have read of him)
Christian Nimmervoll (chief editor) a lobbyist for german purposes, an alonso-basher

what about other f1-newspapers/magazines and their employees?



Why not use this thread to rate and review the coverages of f1 through the whole world after every race?

ITALY: FAVOURISES FERRARI,ALONSO,MONTEZEMOLO,PEREZ AND BIANCHI ...every raceweekend.

[YellowHelmet]

ITALY: FAVOURISES FERRARI,ALONSO,MONTEZEMOLO,PEREZ AND BIANCHI ...every raceweekend.

is there just one italian tv-broadcaster? please name it?
and it would be nice to have some journalists named who are working for them and what there bias looks like.

[One]

It is an entertainment business, like Flav said. So, let us not expect that one talks about Formula One in a same way as you talk about criminal or politics, world disaster. The more fun there is in reports, the more popular the sport will be, which is the aim of sport media. Other games, such as foot balls, baseball, rugby and soon has similar tendency. Formula One media is Tabloid jorno.

[JPW]

Does not exists that thing called unbiased journalism.

That is true however some journos take it too far and get too involved, Ed Gorman from The Times comes to mind during the spankgate affair. Glad he didn't last very long, I believe he's a desk-jockey now.

[bauss]

Of course, the point I was making wasn't that they're favouring him because he's British - that's fair enough, par for the course - but that to an extent they almost overlook Hamilton. Sometimes I almost forget Hamilton is British watching the BBC. In fact, their treatment of Hamilton is actually quite decent in that it's fairly objective, and this would be great if it wasn't for the fact that Button get's slobbered over the whole time instead.

...Since Button joined Mclaren, feels like Hamilton has had no 'home' coverage...

It is what it is, as some said...Journalism is dead...but in truth it was probably never really alive. Human biases always filter through, the more informed you are about the topic, the better you can spot the biases.

In the new age of more and more information, its become even easier to spot...which is probably why we notice it more.

As for F1 coverage and the whole nationalism thing... well they do it in other sports, everyone does it...so I guess its just the way it is. Dislike it, but learnt to accept it...at least most don't try to hide it.

What I detest are those that try to argue they are so fair and balanced, which is a bit insulting to our intelligence cos you know that is not the case. If anything, this is my main gripe with the BBC F1 coverage.

They will furiously deny the Jenson love-in and other biases. With most coverages, you know what you get...with BBC they seem to go lengths to make it more subtle, subliminal and masqueraded as fact...which to me feels sinister and dirty.

Generally once you are aware of the biases, you take everything in with a filter and learn to form your own opinions. None of these journos even the more respected, Brundle, AMUS etc is or ever was gospel.

Edited by bauss, 31 March 2011 - 10:33.

[depailler on tyrrell p34]

is there just one italian tv-broadcaster? please name it?
and it would be nice to have some journalists named who are working for them and what there bias looks like.

rai television is the tv broadcaster
commentator giancfranco mazzoni
co-commentator Ivan Capelli
technical comments ing Bruno
from the paddock ettore giovannelli stella bruno and franco bortuzzo
after the race comments by jean alesi and cesare fiorio...
if somebody know the italian can find here in you tube link a selection of their errors race by race
http://www.youtube.c...r...i show&aq=0

[Watkins74]

...Since Button joined Mclaren, feels like Hamilton has had no 'home' coverage...

It is what it is, as some said...Journalism is dead...but in truth it was probably never really alive. Human biases always filter through, the more informed you are about the topic, the better you can spot the biases.

In the new age of more and more information, its become even easier to spot...which is probably why we notice it more.

As for F1 coverage and the whole nationalism thing... well they do it in other sports, everyone does it...so I guess its just the way it is. Dislike it, but learnt to accept it...at least most don't try to hide it.

What I detest are those that try to argue they are so fair and balanced, which is a bit insulting to our intelligence cos you know that is not the case. If anything, this is my main gripe with the BBC F1 coverage.

They will furiously deny the Jenson love-in and other biases. With most coverages, you know what you get...with BBC they seem to go lengths to make it more subtle, subliminal and masqueraded as fact...which to me feels sinister and dirty.

Generally once you are aware of the biases, you take everything in with a filter and learn to form your own opinions. None of these journos even the more respected, Brundle, AMUS etc is or ever was gospel.

Kind of like posters.

[ktsayshi]

It is an entertainment business, like Flav said. So, let us not expect that one talks about Formula One in a same way as you talk about criminal or politics, world disaster. The more fun there is in reports, the more popular the sport will be, which is the aim of sport media. Other games, such as foot balls, baseball, rugby and soon has similar tendency. Formula One media is Tabloid jorno.

This is an important point and worth restating. It tends to color all the coverage, even that which would attempt to be objective. It's also worth pointing out that the national bias of much F1 reporting can be considered a feature, not a bug, in a series in which competitors are identified by a country's flag and national anthems are played on the podia.

[Villes Gilleneuve]

I suppose in some ways the F1 Paddock is rather like Parliament. It's one central environment where the journalists mingle and work. They all know each other etc.

Your Parliament works?

[ivanalesi]

It's laughable when you hear them biased. I'm not so annoyed by the whole Jenson/Lewis propaganda, more like the one for minors like Paul di Resta... quite a lot of pushing to get him into F1. Beating Vettel in F3ES while he was Friday testing isn't the same as beating him in F1, sorry Jake!
RTL has gotten worse over the years, I dunno why!? Also Nikki Lauda is the same completely crazy old fart and I have no idea why the hell they keep him. He's talking non-stop bs.
I'm more annoyed when journalists don't get something technical and start making false assumptions or when they talk about the junior categories w/o knowing the full picture. But in general my believe is that if you want to be a top F1 journalist, then you gotta be coming from motorsport. Otherwise the lack of knowledge is evident, you can't see it on British TV, but certainly it's visible in the press. There are some exceptions, but these guys are truly living and breathing motorsport 24/7 and they usually cover motorsport, not F1.
Also it's stupid to praise somebody for his wet weather performance one weekend and then make jokes of him the next weekend, they don't forget how to drive in the space of 2 weeks! It's just that wet setups are critical to performance.

[flyer121]

Your Parliament works?

Deserves a smiley after that LOL

[YellowHelmet]

rai television is the tv broadcaster
commentator giancfranco mazzoni
co-commentator Ivan Capelli
technical comments ing Bruno
from the paddock ettore giovannelli stella bruno and franco bortuzzo
after the race comments by jean alesi and cesare fiorio...
if somebody know the italian can find here in you tube link a selection of their errors race by race
http://www.youtube.c...r...i show&aq=0

thanks a lot for that information
could you also talk about their bias.
I think they all tend to favourise Ferrari, but maybe there are also some of them who are trying to be objective?

[weston]

Your Parliament works?

LOL F1 Paddock is a peaceful and friendly place. There was a mahine gun shooting even in (a local) Swiss parliament building few years ago.

[byrkus]

Formula One media is Tabloid jorno.

Sounds like Slovenian TV coverage. In it, you learn more about folks like Jessica Mitchibata or Nicole Sherzinger, than about KERS or movable rear wing... Mostly I have this feeling, as if I was watching some tabloid soap-opera style stories about people, who are totally irrelevant, while on the background there is live picture of a seemingly random race, which goes on almost 'by the way'. Quite sad.

But even sadder is - if you want to have F1 coverage in Slovenian language, there's no real alternative...