Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Bias of journalists


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 Module

Module
  • Member

  • 621 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 09:21

I spend WAY too much time reading different F1 news and am every now and again striken by the bias in articles. This can be seen in reports of races, about transfers and so on. Usually this is adjectives or extra comments on what's happened. Ofcourse my favorite is Andrew Benson :drunk:

 

For example the car/win:

 

Vettel wins a race because he has the best car

Alonso masterfully wins a race, in a dog of a car showing his the most complete driver

Webber wins a race despite RB working against him and giving him a worse car

Hamilton drags a car to a win despite its deficiensy

Rosberg gets a win because luck and special cirkumstances

Räikkönen gets a win because the car is good on tires

Button wins because his a strategic mastermind

 

And so on...

 

An example of AB's article about Ricciardo getting the Red Bull seat and why Kimi didn't:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/23938308

 

"Raikkonen is a proven winner but was demanding a bigger salary than the Australian (money hardly was an issue for RB as they said them selves), might have (so now he starts guessing after unsubstantiated claim) been less compliant if asked to support Vettel (not remembering Kimi helped Massa) and the team had questions over his willingness to work hard on the technicalities of F1 (a guess again)."

 

Different journalists have different bias and it would be interresting to discuss who has what and how it is seen. This isn't about driverbashing but about how journalists in different countrys by added comments and perceptions paint drivers in different light

 



Advertisement

#2 Cool Beans

Cool Beans
  • Member

  • 1,553 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 05 September 2013 - 09:29

The vast majority of F1 writers are not journalists to begin with. Rewording press releases and reposting news from other sources is called blogging.



#3 fer312t

fer312t
  • Member

  • 783 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 05 September 2013 - 09:36

For example the car/win:

 

Vettel wins a race because he has the best car

Alonso masterfully wins a race, in a dog of a car showing his the most complete driver

Webber wins a race despite RB working against him and giving him a worse car

Hamilton drags a car to a win despite its deficiensy

Rosberg gets a win because luck and special cirkumstances

Räikkönen gets a win because the car is good on tires

 

 

Sounds about right to me :wave:

watching all the races you might get the same impression too :p



#4 Desdirodeabike

Desdirodeabike
  • Member

  • 1,890 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 05 September 2013 - 09:50

Benson is a hack of a journalist. I just can't take anything he writes at face value anymore. He has ulterior motives and preferences that are badly hidden to be honest.

Only one I know who is worse than him (although by quite a margin) is Lobato.



#5 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,479 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 05 September 2013 - 11:51

Oh good, another of these pointless threads about journalistic bias. Where 'bias' means 'says nasty things about my favourite driver'

 

I guess you just want to read stuff saying X (insert your favourite driver/team's name) is brilliant and peerless and is doing great because of their massive talent.  I prefer to read other opinions even if they seem to go against what I currently think.  Maybe I will hear something that makes me adjust my views.  It's called having an open mind.  Try it!



#6 KirilVarbanov

KirilVarbanov
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:05

We have already had such topics here - just use the advanced Search, select titles only, enter 'bias' and read the opinions. 



#7 Module

Module
  • Member

  • 621 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:06

Oh good, another of these pointless threads about journalistic bias. Where 'bias' means 'says nasty things about my favourite driver'

 

I guess you just want to read stuff saying X (insert your favourite driver/team's name) is brilliant and peerless and is doing great because of their massive talent.  I prefer to read other opinions even if they seem to go against what I currently think.  Maybe I will hear something that makes me adjust my views.  It's called having an open mind.  Try it!

 

Sorry if you dislike the tread...

 

Actually I'm not that interested to hear about my favourite driver but thanks. I'm actually interested about how different drivers are depicted in different countries and as this is a international forum I would be very interested about hearing from countries, magazines and so oon that i do't read or understand.

 

In many of the treads here people post information from different journalists and then the next one discredits the same journalists becouse they are bias or crap or whatever. I'm realy interrested in a tread where I could read "reviews" of formula writers across different nations in one place and not on every tread with a link to a article



#8 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,863 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:09

The vast majority of F1 writers are not journalists to begin with. Rewording press releases and reposting news from other sources is called blogging.

This, QFT.



#9 Module

Module
  • Member

  • 621 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:09

Sorry if you dislike the tread...

 

Actually I'm not that interested to hear about my favourite driver but thanks. I'm actually interested about how different drivers are depicted in different countries and as this is a international forum I would be very interested about hearing from countries, magazines and so oon that i do't read or understand.

 

In many of the treads here people post information from different journalists and then the next one discredits the same journalists becouse they are bias or crap or whatever. I'm realy interrested in a tread where I could read "reviews" of formula writers across different nations in one place and not on every tread with a link to a article

 

Actually the topic should have been "review F1 writers in your country"



#10 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 2,120 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:15

Ofcourse my favorite is Andrew Benson

 

Vettel wins a race because he has the best car

Alonso masterfully wins a race, in a dog of a car showing his the most complete driver

Webber wins a race despite RB working against him and giving him a worse car

Hamilton drags a car to a win despite its deficiensy

Rosberg gets a win because luck and special cirkumstances

Räikkönen gets a win because the car is good on tires

Button wins because his a strategic mastermind

 

I don't see how any of those are biases that are limited to Andrew Benson's blogging, most F1 journalists/commentators i've read over the last few years have been saying the same kind of things.

 

Maybe it's a bit lazy for them to always fall back on those ideas, but they are generally true.



#11 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,479 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:16

Actually the topic should have been "review F1 writers in your country"

Smoke and mirrors.  Still an excuse to bash people who say things that you don't agree with.



#12 Deerfield

Deerfield
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:31

Stereotypes. We all love them, use them, and journalists as well. They also need to simplify and to create charachters easily recognizable. So Vettel is and probably will be forever the fast but childish boy, Webber the gritty and mistreated aussie, Button the smart and lucky one, and so on... just like in the past Senna was The Master (and he was really! :love: ), Prost the Professor, Mansell the Lion, Lauda the Computer...



#13 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • In the running for best OP of 2014

  • 3,265 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:33

Oh good, another of these pointless threads about journalistic bias. Where 'bias' means 'says nasty things about my favourite driver'

 

I guess you just want to read stuff saying X (insert your favourite driver/team's name) is brilliant and peerless and is doing great because of their massive talent.  I prefer to read other opinions even if they seem to go against what I currently think.  Maybe I will hear something that makes me adjust my views.  It's called having an open mind.  Try it!

 

'Having an open mind' would also constitute accepting the possibility that the media could be biased--ironic, isn't it?



#14 ebc

ebc
  • Member

  • 230 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:37

Maybe it's a bit lazy for them to always fall back on those ideas, but they are generally true.


It is lazy but they aren't true except for the Rosberg one.

#15 Fontainebleau

Fontainebleau
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,028 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:45

Benson is a hack of a journalist. I just can't take anything he writes at face value anymore. He has ulterior motives and preferences that are badly hidden to be honest.

Only one I know who is worse than him (although by quite a margin) is Lobato.

You should read Leo Turrini more often... he even makes up the dialogues among different people! Although he does this in his blog, so by definition it is a blog entry and not an article (even if often they are taken as the latter).


Edited by Fontainebleau, 05 September 2013 - 12:47.


#16 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,286 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:57

Smoke and mirrors.  Still an excuse to bash people who say things that you don't agree with.

Basically.



#17 Fontainebleau

Fontainebleau
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,028 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 13:07

Smoke and mirrors.  Still an excuse to bash people who say things that you don't agree with.

As Seanspeed says, yes. Having said that, as an Alonso supporter I will make an exception with Lobato - he is unbearable!!!



#18 Thomas99

Thomas99
  • Member

  • 1,696 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 05 September 2013 - 13:21

Everything is biased. If you give an opinion on one side the other side will complain.

 

This is more reader bias complaining about journalistic opinion.


Edited by Thomas99, 05 September 2013 - 13:21.


#19 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,035 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 05 September 2013 - 13:32

One of the problems with journalist bias is there might be a good reason for it.  If the journo finds Driver X is a clueless tosser being led through everything by engineers and telemetry, then good results for Driver X will be credited to his equipment. 

 

Or if Driver Y has suffered a dip in form because his wife's seriously ill, but Driver Y wants that kept out of public view, then the journos might be a little more willing to find other reasons for a lack of results.

 

How many people knew for example that Mike Hawthorn won the world title when he was mortally ill?  Yet even today people denigrate his achievement because he had fewer wins than Moss. 



Advertisement

#20 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 05 September 2013 - 13:41

I spend WAY too much time reading different F1 news and am every now and again striken by the bias in articles. This can be seen in reports of races, about transfers and so on. Usually this is adjectives or extra comments on what's happened. Ofcourse my favorite is Andrew Benson :drunk:

 

For example the car/win:

 

Vettel wins a race because he has the best car

Alonso masterfully wins a race, in a dog of a car showing his the most complete driver

Webber wins a race despite RB working against him and giving him a worse car

Hamilton drags a car to a win despite its deficiensy

Rosberg gets a win because luck and special cirkumstances

Räikkönen gets a win because the car is good on tires

Button wins because his a strategic mastermind

 

And so on...

 

An example of AB's article about Ricciardo getting the Red Bull seat and why Kimi didn't:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/23938308

 

"Raikkonen is a proven winner but was demanding a bigger salary than the Australian (money hardly was an issue for RB as they said them selves), might have (so now he starts guessing after unsubstantiated claim) been less compliant if asked to support Vettel (not remembering Kimi helped Massa) and the team had questions over his willingness to work hard on the technicalities of F1 (a guess again)."

 

Different journalists have different bias and it would be interresting to discuss who has what and how it is seen. This isn't about driverbashing but about how journalists in different countrys by added comments and perceptions paint drivers in different light

 

In the final analysis, Benson's job is to sell papers (or advertising on the BBC site), and make $$$ for his employer.

 

Controversy sells, and people are following the link to the BBC site ...... Ka-ching!



#21 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,693 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 05 September 2013 - 14:05

How many people knew for example that Mike Hawthorn won the world title when he was mortally ill?  Yet even today people denigrate his achievement because he had fewer wins than Moss. 

 

Yet ironically it was Moss who avoided doing National Service because of kidney problems.



#22 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 8,139 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 05 September 2013 - 14:21

Basically for most it goes that if a journalist says something negative about their favourite driver and something positive about their least favourite, then by default the journalist must be hopelessly biased.  Those who suffer the most angst about journalists tend to be the most blinkered in their own views.

 

Some journos definitely write for their audience.  They do have to make a living.  Some are obssessed with putting drivers in neat little boxes, and faithfully stick to those even when evidence to the contrary stares them in the face.  Some just invent stuff to create a story.  As in everything, there is good and bad.  



#23 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 1,745 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 05 September 2013 - 14:41

What is interesting about this topic, and others such as the SV being booed one, is how little human mentality has evolved in terms of division. Interestingly, in South America's Fox transmission of F1, there is a clear bias towards FA, because he's "Latin". I guess they don't realize that someone from Spain nowadays probably has more in common with any other nationality in Europe than with someone in South America. It's funny, sad really when you think about it, that in the 21st century many "-isms" still play such an important role...



#24 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 September 2013 - 14:45

what illness did mike have? didnt know that.

 

and rosberg has been lucky, at silverstone the 2 faster cars where removed, and he had a puncture when the safety car came out. but his china and monaco wins he performed really damn well.



#25 Module

Module
  • Member

  • 621 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 14:51

Some journos definitely write for their audience.  They do have to make a living.  Some are obssessed with putting drivers in neat little boxes, and faithfully stick to those even when evidence to the contrary stares them in the face.  Some just invent stuff to create a story.  As in everything, there is good and bad.  

 

My point exactly! And the question is, who should i read to get solid unbiased reporting, with whom should I take into account their nationality and who is just inventing things?

 

This is a question rising in many topics, is this reporter reliable or not? In this forum poeple require sources for everything and sadly theese are usually writers storys of a credibility a person from another country has a hard time figuring out.

 

If somebody has a qoute from Lobato on Hamilton, is it a good source. I Turrini hints at Kimi going to Ferrari is it reliable, if Amus writes about Ricciardo are they good??



#26 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,304 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 15:16

I think it is a symptom of sports writing in general.  Journalists are fans too, and short of libel or slander, there seems to be a certain amount of allowance for "speculative-fact" type writing.  Sports is entertainment and you see a similar type of writing in the latter genre too.  Front page headline articles are often explosive, exciting, gossipy and written to mislead or blown entirely out of proportion.  However, some well written articles also slip into the mix.

 

It is easy and convenient to say that people are merely sensitive about their favorite driver, but the truth is, there are some very biased writers out there. For example, I am certainly not a Hamilton fan, but I took exception with an article that made him sound like a hardened criminal after the hooning incident. After Brazil 12, we got an article that made Alonso seem ready for the funny farm which was to me, ridiculous, and I am not his fan either.

 

If is very difficult to place any trust in the F1 headline media. They do everything from putting unsaid words in individual's mouths to stating speculation and hopes as fact. The bias is rampant, not just against anyone's favorite driver, but against everyone's favorite driver, engineer, team, team principlal and everyone and anyone connected to the paddock - you may have to go to a different county's media to find the bias, but there is bias for all.  There is a lot of bad journalism in sports, but some good as well, making it difficult to parse, but it is what it is.


Edited by bourbon, 05 September 2013 - 15:24.


#27 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 1,745 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 05 September 2013 - 15:48

In the final analysis, Benson's job is to sell papers (or advertising on the BBC site), and make $$$ for his employer.

 

Controversy sells, and people are following the link to the BBC site ...... Ka-ching!

Ethics at its best!



#28 chrisj

chrisj
  • Member

  • 578 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 05 September 2013 - 15:50

Are there any that provide expert insight? My understanding is that they all watch races by viewing TVs in a designated press room; I suppose many of them see FIA timing just like any fan at home, and they rely mostly on PR flack for information from the teams. The only value-add that on-site journalists have is access to gossip and opinions. It seems very clubby and insular, with all of them deathly afraid of Bernie.



#29 Wanderer

Wanderer
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 16:21

Obviously journalists don't write what's true, they don't even write what they think is true. They write what people want to read, that gets them clicks, that gets them money. It seems people are mostly interested in reading something like "our driver's the best; if he's not winning at the moment it's down to other reasons." For that reason you'll always have national bias in the press. 



#30 wrcva

wrcva
  • Member

  • 978 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 18:07

A different sort of bias is reluctance to report important stuff.    The best example is Charlie-Brawn collaboration in both 2009 DD, and recent Merc secret Pirelli testing cases.   Common to both events, iirc, are;

  • Altering championship outcomes
  • There is great deal of documentation about both cases because there were hearings on both, albeit by a kangaroo panel
  • Charlie himself provided the key (and single) technical expert testimony in both cases
  • Charlie provided the outcome recommendation to the panel in both cases (he does that for pretty much anything about tech matters in f1)
  • His recommendations became the final judgement in both cases in favor of Brawn

Not a single journalistic soul questioned WTF is going on between these two, let alone picking up on striking similarities between the cases.

 

Just because Charlie can revoke press credentials of anybody anywhere as he wishes should journos be scared of that kind of bullying?  If yes, then, what are the definitions of journalistic independence and ethics?  



#31 ashley313

ashley313
  • Member

  • 224 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 05 September 2013 - 18:33

Believe it or not - whoever writes the short news for Sky F1 does, IMO, the best job. Just the facts of whatever has happened. No impressions, no subjective characterizations of anyone or anything. I refuse to read anything by any "journalist" that starts with "my thoughts on..." or "some thoughts on...". These are all just people who want to gain influence, not inform the public. 



#32 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 3,712 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 05 September 2013 - 20:15



Believe it or not - whoever writes the short news for Sky F1 does, IMO, the best job. Just the facts of whatever has happened. No impressions, no subjective characterizations of anyone or anything. I refuse to read anything by any "journalist" that starts with "my thoughts on..." or "some thoughts on...". These are all just people who want to gain influence, not inform the public.

I basically do the exact same thing..



#33 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,532 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 05 September 2013 - 21:18

'Having an open mind' would also constitute accepting the possibility that the media could be biased--ironic, isn't it?

Could be? Of course media is biased and of course it shows in pretty much any and all opinion pieces by definition really. The only unbiased pieces of news are non embellished results.

 

Objective opinion is on oxymoron.



#34 jimctu

jimctu
  • New Member

  • 4 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 05 September 2013 - 21:49

this happnes not only on F1 but in most of the sports different than soccer or basketball...

flags_1.jpg


Edited by jimctu, 05 September 2013 - 21:51.


#35 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,405 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 05 September 2013 - 22:00

We have already had such topics here - just use the advanced Search, select titles only, enter 'bias' and read the opinions. 

This one is the bestest; http://forums.autosp...and-journalism/

 

Otherwise known as the 'hang on, someone has said something bad about Alonso.  I must bump my thread' thread.

 

Sadly it's archived.

 

I would agree that a journalist should strive to put across news with the least possible bias, but we do all have it and it is difficult to get away from.  Those who write stories which do not have bias perhaps are not involved with the personalities closely in the paddock and write from their home or office.



#36 HopkinsonF1

HopkinsonF1
  • Member

  • 330 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 06 September 2013 - 10:24

In the final analysis, Benson's job is to sell papers (or advertising on the BBC site), and make $$$ for his employer.

 

Controversy sells, and people are following the link to the BBC site ...... Ka-ching!

The BBC don't sell advertising on their site, or indeed anywhere. The 'more clicks, more money' argument certainly doesn't work for the Beeb.



#37 Module

Module
  • Member

  • 621 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 06 September 2013 - 10:32

 

 

I would agree that a journalist should strive to put across news with the least possible bias, but we do all have it and it is difficult to get away from.  Those who write stories which do not have bias perhaps are not involved with the personalities closely in the paddock and write from their home or office.

 

 

I still think that they should write, as some do, on different levels in different articles. A race report should tell what happened in the race, in an analyzis you can tell why you think it happened and in comments your views on people and teams and such.

 

It's confusing to read racereports where there is preset bias because it makes it hard to understand what happened. If somebody say for example in a race report that somebody drags a dog of a car up it just makes me wonder was it broken, had they problems or what was it? Then you need to read the next report to understand that there was nothing wrong or that it actually was broken.



#38 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,693 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 06 September 2013 - 18:04

what illness did mike have? didnt know that.

 

Serious kidney problems, the car crash may have been a blessing in disguise - he was doomed to face a probably much more painful death within a couple of years.

 

I suspect his illness was the primary reason for him only being great "on his day".



#39 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 13,174 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 06 September 2013 - 22:28

Is the OP really surprised by this?
Jp

Advertisement

#40 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 06 September 2013 - 22:43

Yeah, Andrew Benson is right up there in the ignore list. I am quite surprised that he has lasted this far writing for BBC. I can only assume this is because BBC was way out of touch with F1 until they got rights few years ago, so not much familiarity of F1 at higher editorial side of BBC and that is why this guy is able to continue there. I can never see him being hired and continued at a media source like Autosport or AMuS.

 

There is a fundamental problem with F1 reporting. None of these journalists can actually critique an issue in an earnest, particularly on FIA. FIA is the one giving the passes to attend GPs and media sessions. If they are not in FIA's good books, they really can't be much of a F1 reporter. Same with teams and Ecclestone. If you write something bad about Ecclestone, his power and reach is such that the same thing that FIA would do would happen. They have some leeway with teams and drivers are really their easy prey. So, may be this set up brings out lot of bad journalists and they are the one whose diss drivers and spread false rumours, basically run amok with whatever pleases their mind.


Edited by SpaMaster, 06 September 2013 - 22:49.


#41 Ikebana

Ikebana
  • Member

  • 99 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 06 September 2013 - 23:01

Benson is a hack of a journalist. I just can't take anything he writes at face value anymore. He has ulterior motives and preferences that are badly hidden to be honest.

Only one I know who is worse than him (although by quite a margin) is Lobato.

 

Which is basically the same thing done by the journalists that however say good things about the drivers you like, and bad things about the dirvers you dislike.

 

 

 

It is pretty clear that journalism is nowadays after all mostly focused to sell, but in order to stay honourable we must accept this fact also even when it doesn't fit with our biases, which is ironically an attitude hard to find even by those that complain about biases. I guess it's human nature.

 

Anyway, I think this topic is a good one, there is a lot to debate about journalism, but on internet forums people will just talk bad about journalists that say things they don't like about the drivers they support so unfortunately I don't expect much from this topic. I hope I'm wrong.


Edited by Ikebana, 06 September 2013 - 23:10.