284 replies to this topic

[Don Capps]

I have merged three threads together for this big 'un since they cover much of the same ground.

I think that it must be made very clear that Paul Fearnley and John McIlroy along with the others in the Haymarket family -- especially the crew at Racer -- are by no means the "spawns" I refer to in my frustration with with Haymarket -- the distinction of being the Spawns of Satan bwlongs to the Haymarket bean-counters and those of their ilk who browbeat the editors to increase the exchequer or they'll bloody well find someone else who will.

I tend to take some things personal. It was a bitter blow to finally have to admit that Autosport was not going to be what I wanted it to be and then drop it. It was months and months befoe I finally adjusted to not having it pop up in the mailbox. Likewise, I was literally on the verge of dropping Motor Sport when it morphed. If it is any comfort, I think Paul has done a much better job with the magazine than his predecessor.

I wish that things weren't what they are, but they are. However, I also realize that there is something that makes 45,000 folks buy Autosport each week and 30,000 Motor Sport each month. But, I find those numbers a bit shocking really. Far lower than I would ever had anticipated. It is obvious that something is amiss, exactly what is an open question at the moment.

[Don Capps]

According to John McIlroy, there was scarcely a peep in the mailbag concerning the crashfest. The more one ponders that the more depressing it becomes....

[Shockabuku]

Surely then if people can voice their opinions and concerns both here and on Ten Tenths, then we can take a moment to send an e-mail to the Autosport letters page.

They probably won't get published, and may get treated with the same regard as John McIlroy has chosen to show so far, however it certainly couldn't hurt.

Their e-mail address is autosport.letters@haynet.com

Here's the message that I've just sent off to them:

Please advise Mr McIlroy and his editorial team that the Greatest Crashes feature in this weeks magazine is not the kind of journalism that I expect from Autosport.
The feature had no merit that I could see (such as a discussion of increased circuit safety, car design, etc), however I did notice that it followed a large advertisement for "Crash" and "Havoc" videos. A coincidence, no doubt.
Furthermore, I hope that this crass and sensationalist feature was merely a one-off misjudgement, as opposed to an indication of how the features in Autosport are going to develop in the future.

By the way, don't bother trying to send your comments via their website, unless your message consists of less than "512 letters (including spaces)"

[Jim Thurman]

Originally posted by Don Capps
According to John McIlroy, there was scarcely a peep in the mailbag concerning the crashfest. The more one ponders that the more depressing it becomes....

Don,

Is it possible that they've simply adapted the tactics of the American media and are telling people what they want them to believe? (IOW, an "information" campaign). In dealings with the U.S. media, I've found them to contradict themselves and basically tell anyone, anything in an effort to prevent them from digging up any truth that contradicts with their agendas and approach - which they are hell bent on doing regardless.

You've likely had your fill of Monty Python-isms in that other thread, but one of theirs so applies to this sort of thing:

"And when I say there is no cannibalism in the Royal Navy, of course I mean there is some."

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Shockabuku

Here's the message that I've just sent off to them:

By the way, don't bother trying to send your comments via their website, unless your message consists of less than "512 letters (including spaces)"

...bit like everything else in the mag apart from Roebuck's rants about smoking or the Blair regime?

[Gary Davies]

This is intended to be neither an endorsement nor a condemnation of Autosport’s current stance, but it does, I think, go to the milieu in which many magazines are operating today.

I watched The Belgian Grand Prix on Sunday and must confess I was finding it rather engaging until a point - oh, I don’t where ... perhaps it was after the 25th caramboulage or so - that it occurred to me that this was a pale imitation of a Grand Epreuve. This was a display of immature and overindulgent driving by people from whom we should expect the best in the world.

But clearly, I was out of step. ITV’s lead (sic) commentator was having a whale of a time and demonstrated this by averring on the ITV website that it was ”a cracker of a race” and that “It had everything- incident, overtaking, some superb drives and some very gutsy behaviour...” Gosh!

The web forums were full of breathless and orgasmic praise. The kids had never seen anything like it! Excitement plus! Fantastic crashes and blowouts. Bring on the beer and pizza! Belch!

I got to thinking about the art of driving a car as fast as it can be driven, surrounded by 20 or so equally competitive souls. And I looked up some words Tony Brooks spoke to Roebuck some time ago. (And how appropriate that one of his great wins was at Spa) Tony said: ”...although nobody wanted to get killed or hurt, the challenge was to drive as fast as you could, while realising the consequences of going off. Nobody will persuade me that there isn't more of a challenge to the driver if he knows that he might hurt himself if he goes off the road.”

And then: "I think there's a lack of discipline among drivers today, but I don't blame them altogether. I think it's inevitable once you create an environment where they can make mistakes and get away with it. Brick walls and trees and ditches instill a discipline, believe me.

Someone made a point earlier about everything new being merde and I pondered that assertion with a view to challenging it, but this, surely, is a case where the point is well made.

I will not call into question the impressive skills of today’s top drivers, nor the engineering excellence of the cars they steer.

But I wonder if those folks who saw Sunday’s race as some sort of zenith would have the slightest appreciation of what Tony Brooks was actually doing when he wrestled that Vanwall around the 1958 version of Spa-Francorchamps at better than 200km/h.

Yes, I know, I’m well into fartdom.

[green-blood]

the length of these threads prove to me that people care, and are hence a littel emotional and so please do not be offended by some of what I may now type

I consider Motorsport, in its current post 97 re-launch, to be a signpost. It is a magazine, yes it could be more in depth, yes it could avoid some of the sensationalist stuff (tripoli GP) yes there are lots of Ferraris on the covers - but they have all been iconic cars have they not. I diferentiate between MAGAZINE and JOURNAL... its not a journal, its not aimed at anything highbrow, even the most casual historics fan has their favourit articles. I'm a fairly young fella at 28 (just this week too) I always had an interest in old cars (hence my 66 mini) and back in 96/97 was growing out of my Custom Car phase and buying F1 racing and performance car, with regular "read it on the bus" autosports...when one month autosport came with a free copy of the relaunched Motorsport - I had never seen this title in Ireland before, but I was hooked and I've not missed a copy since.... I'm not hooked on MS, I'm hooked on the scene. There is a very obvious lack of young blood at most historic events I hope the new launch attracts new enthusiasts.

As I said at the outset I consider MS to be signpost, it tells me stories which I usually want to hear more about, and so my bookselves now heave. It shows me cars I will never drive. It highlights events of the calibre we simply dont have in our small Irish market and so I have visited Goodwood FOS twice in the past 6 years. I've enjoyed the format and hope it wont be butchered too much to compete with Octane - which I also find elitist, I hope it wont be trying to compete with EVO and Autocar for supercar stories, I hope it wont be tring to compete with autosport for club racing news....but I also lament the red top change - the green was just about the most distinctive on the shelf. I dont read every article, in fact (sacrilige) - I never read WB, I just live in a different world, and I dont believe every word I read in an editorial, be that Taylor or Roebuk - but I do take their agruements and I do think sometimes with them sometimes against them - and thats what keeps me interested, I keep wanting to know more. TNF has been brilliant, but I love getting my MS in the door, even if it does take 2 weeks to get to Ireland!!!


and thats my 2(euro)cents worth

[Eric McLoughlin]

Green-blood - MS used to be easily obtainable in Ireland (well Dublin anyway) in the 70s and 80s - although I rearely bought it in those days being more into aviation at the time.

[green-blood]

It probably was, as I've picked up a good few year sets at classic car shows in Ireland over the past few years including a ropey 1982 season set I read in one weekend.... I had just never seen it back then

[Eric McLoughlin]

If anyone is interested, one of the guilty party who are behind the revamping of Motor Sport has raised his head above the pararpet over on www.pistonheads.co.uk He has been talking about the reasons behind the change on a Goodwood Revival thread under the "General Gassing" forum.

I hardly ever bought Motor Sport in those days, preferring instead to "browse" the latest issue in the O'Connell Street branch of Easons - until some old dragon would march down the line of browsers, removing the magazines from our hands and putting them back on the shelves saying - "No reading, this is not a library you know".

Irish hospitality how are you!

[Racer.Demon]

Originally posted by Don Capps
There is not -- and obviously never will be -- anything at Atlas besides TNF on the same level as 8W and Leif, just for starters. Once, I had very high hopes that this would happen. Then I was willing to wait as things were worked out. Now, after having waited and waited, no way is Atlas going to make that next step. I have given up on any such hopes. Opportunity after opportunity squandered to the point where I think that it is a dead issue. I am thankful for 8W and Leif and DD and others who do make it possible for things to see the light of day.

Somehow missed these kind words first time out, but I'd like to use the opportunity to point out that 8W (which is affiliated to Atlas F1 anyway) and Leif (who in turn is affiliated to 8W ;) ) remain very happy to act as a breeding ground for motor-racing history scholarship, now that the proprietary TNF site has proved to be the fata morgana we all feared and dreaded it would be.

It's fair to say that it's been a bit quiet on 8W's front for the past months, and that's probably due to its editors not being the bloodhounds in search for new writers and material they once were . Having said that, it is no offense to approach us yourselves - you'll still find that we are happy to accommodate the best of TNF.

I'd like to think that where TNF's center function is the collaborative build-up of knowledge, it is 8W's and Golden Era's duty to preserve it and make it more accessible to others. As it is for several others such as ORC.com, formula2.net, F1 Rejects, GPH or GEL which certainly deserve a very honourable mention here too.

[Don Capps]

I just looked at the remarks that Stuart Forrest made over at Pistonheads. If anything, it is some faint comfort to know that he, McIlroy, Fearnley, and others seem aware of TNF's presence, although I not certain that it has much bearing on anything they think about ot do.

However, there was something that he mentioned, one specific item that caused me to sigh and quietly curse: "....but, in addition, will also cover more historic motor racing ...." I have come to generally loathe "historic motor racing" since usually the only thing historic is the wheezer Walter Mitty at the wheel bashing around the track.... In moderation all this is great fun, but in recent years it seems to have spun completely out of control and has begun to do things that I find difficult to tolerate.

I found Forest's remarks about all this interesting: "OK, so why are we making the changes? Very simply, Motor Sport's circulation is in gradual long term decline at a time when historic Motor Sport is at its most popular. In part this is because it is becoming harder and harder to keep a magazine such as Motor Sport widely available on book stalls in the UK. It's also because the product speaks to its existing readers very well, but doesn't do enough to attract new readers. "

Well, other than Haymarket being quite delighted with all the free publicity it has gotten over all this, it seems that changes will happen and we will have to take what is on the menu, like it or not.

Indeed, this is the very curse of the no-win situation that many of us find ourselves in -- because these magazines have been such an intergral part of our lives for so many years (usually decades and decades) there is huge amount of residual loyalty that remains even after you force yourself to walk away. If I ever thought that Autosport was what I was looking for there is little doubt I would re-subscribe to it. Despite my grousing, Motor Sport has had the occasional piece worth reading -- often WB.....

As I often remind myself, I need to keep the words of one of the greatest men I worked for in mind: Being right is often irrelevant.

[Darren Galpin]

This may be a heretical statement, but I have *no* interest whatsoever in reading about historic racing. Watching it is a different matter, but I don't really care about who is leading what series or whatever, as that isn't the point as far as I'm concerned. I want less about this rather than more, and I usually skip over the pages covering this in Motor Sport..........

[Twin Window]

Actually, I'm the same as you Darren - although I do look at the pics.

Attending historic meetings is different for me too; it's all about the individual cars both close up and being driven. However, should you be lucky enough to get a good race, then that's a bonus in my book!

Twinny

[SEdward]

It annoys me when publishers or editors refer to "market demand" and "taste" as if they were given, uncontrollable and naturally occurring phenomena. They are not. They are the product of calculated and carefully developed marketing strategies. I tend to believe that the great unwashed, to which I belong, wants what it gets rather than getting what it wants.

Market demand and taste are generally created and controlled by people who have something to sell. There is nothing irresistible, irreversible or inevitable about the much-praised and all too little despised, so-called market forces. They are the product of human invention and, as such, are fallible and can be reversed, or even destroyed.

This may appear irrelevant, but I noticed a quote from the Autosport editor about market demand earlier in this thread.

Edward.

[Racer.Demon]

Originally posted by SEdward
Market demand and taste are generally created and controlled by people who have something to sell.

Me being amongst the slaves who are Selling The Great Capitalist Lie for a living - i.e. I am in marketing - I will readily concur that "market demand" is usually supply-driven...

[Don Capps]

Lately, I have been having this particular thought ramble through my mind on a very frequent basis: Why do I even bother?

[MCS]

Originally posted by Eric McLoughlin
If anyone is interested, one of the guilty party who are behind the revamping of Motor Sport has raised his head above the pararpet over on www.pistonheads.co.uk He has been talking about the reasons behind the change on a Goodwood Revival thread under the "General Gassing" forum.

I hardly ever bought Motor Sport in those days, preferring instead to "browse" the latest issue in the O'Connell Street branch of Easons - until some old dragon would march down the line of browsers, removing the magazines from our hands and putting them back on the shelves saying - "No reading, this is not a library you know".

Irish hospitality how are you!

For some reason - and despite several attempts with the "search" facility - couldn't get to the Motor Sport bit, but I really did enjoy the "Fruity sweet wrappers spark complaint" bit where a Catholic college complained about new Haribo sweet wrappers which it claimed portrayed fruit in sexual positions.

Go and have a look (and, no, I won't provide a url...!)

MCS

[Jim Thurman]

Originally posted by SEdward
Market demand and taste are generally created and controlled by people who have something to sell. There is nothing irresistible, irreversible or inevitable about the much-praised and all too little despised, so-called market forces. They are the product of human invention and, as such, are fallible and can be reversed, or even destroyed.

Edward, damn how I wish I would have written that. Excellent

Since this is something I go on about, I'm disappointed that I didn't offer more along those lines.

A teacher editorializing in a local newspaper remarked on how the media: "project rather than reflect when it comes to taste and trends." This came in response to a PBS television special focusing on folks trying to jump on a new trend.

Like the show, there have been several newspaper columnists get close to the crux of this matter, but they always stop short of pointing out the manipulation. I guess if they go that extra step they would have to address "The Myth of Free Will"...or maybe they are afraid what they would find. Going deeply would force examination and questioning of the entire workings of this country - and that is someplace few want to go, let alone question. They fear looking in the mirror.

What the marketeers truly seem to want (at least Stateside), is for anyone that dissents or anyone with any intelligence to simply throw up their hands, accept it all as "market driven" and grumble about "what these dumb people people want" - without further thought. Most columnists here take that approach without any analysis.

Again, excellently worded Edward.

As far as reversed or destroyed...I vote the latter ;)


"I wanna destroy you..." - Robyn Hitchcock

[VAR1016]

Originally posted by SEdward
It annoys me when publishers or editors refer to "market demand" and "taste" as if they were given, uncontrollable and naturally occurring phenomena. They are not. They are the product of calculated and carefully developed marketing strategies. I tend to believe that the great unwashed, to which I belong, wants what it gets rather than getting what it wants.

Market demand and taste are generally created and controlled by people who have something to sell. There is nothing irresistible, irreversible or inevitable about the much-praised and all too little despised, so-called market forces. They are the product of human invention and, as such, are fallible and can be reversed, or even destroyed.

This may appear irrelevant, but I noticed a quote from the Autosport editor about market demand earlier in this thread.

Edward.

Very elegant; thank you - and also a pretty good explanation as to why so much that is "new" is crap!

PdeRL

[Twin Window]

Originally posted by MCS

...which it claimed portrayed fruit in sexual positions.

MCS

Frankie Howerd? Larry Grayson? No wonder they complained...

Twinny

[Eric McLoughlin]

The relevant Piston Heads post is under a thread entitled "Goodwood Revival....2004" in the "General Gassing" forum. It's on about Page 3 of the forum.

[RTH]

Originally posted by Don Capps
According to John McIlroy, there was scarcely a peep in the mailbag concerning the crashfest. The more one ponders that the more depressing it becomes....

As Christine Keeler said.........."Well he would say that ,.....wouldn't he ! "

Actually today's issue 2/9/04 is even more depressing than last week's! - really it's become a superficial children's 'fanzine'. - There is no real news in it , it's all just big pictures and boring unattractive ones at that . No issues are tackled, no criticisms are made, everything seems to have been sanitised, the print , the layout is both ghastly and definitely not user friendly, acres of wasted space on blurred pointless silly pictures , - yet next to no room at all for any proper club racing reports , races dismissed in 10 words!

Staff writers that just state the blindingly obvious ever week.

After buying it continuously for 36 years, I just don't see any point anymore, I think it now a waste of time and even I am going to knock it on the head.

[Don Capps]

As Christine Keeler said.........."Well he would say that,.....wouldn't he ! "



I wonder if they get it?

[JohnS]

Originally posted by RTH


As Christine Keeler said.........."Well he would say that ,.....wouldn't he ! "

Wasn't it Mandy Rice-Davies who said that (he said pedantically!)?

[Vitesse2]

Same quote occurred to me: and it was Mandy.

(Similarly pedantically) - and see page 37 of C&SC's October edition just to prove I really am a pedant! What am I going to do with a baseball cap though? Not quite my normal attire ....

[RTH]

Originally posted by Vitesse2
What am I going to do with a baseball cap though? Not quite my normal attire ....

Quite right too , a clothing item that never looks good on anyone, particually 'toe curling' when on the heads of Presidents and Prime Ministers and perhaps should have remained confined to the baseball field!

As Basil said to Sybil......." You wouldn't understand dear it's called style"

[oldtimer]

Fascinating thread, and coming in late, as usual, I would like to add a personal experience.

As a poor student in England in the early fifties, I became a 'casual reader' of MotorSport. At that time, MotorSport sold for 3 pence more than the weekly Motor and Autocar. The 'casual reader' then continued faithfully to buy, and after emigration, to subscribe to MotorSport for over 40 years. In that time, MotorSport went through a little bit of an advertising crisis (hence the disappearance of the Ferodo advertisement on the front cover), but readership increased to the point where it could boast of a 'largest readership' in the '70s IIRC, certainly well, well beyond the current 30,000 or so. I stopped my subscription in the '90s when DSJ got muscled out of the door, or whatever happened to him.

So my point for those who debate the need for marketing thrusts or gimics is: What hooked a young motor enthusiast into such loyal readership?

[David Birchall]

Originally posted by oldtimer
Fascinating thread, and coming in late, as usual, I would like to add a personal experience.

So my point for those who debate the need for marketing thrusts or gimics is: What hooked a young motor enthusiast into such loyal readership?

Perhaps I shouldn't have deleted the middle part of your post but I was trying to cut to the chase; my own experience with MotorSport is very similiar except that I was introduced to it in the early 1960s and continued with a subscription until about 2001.

'What hooked a young motor enthusiast into such loyal readership?" I would suggest that the qualifications of the writers makes a huge difference. DSJ, WB, John Blunsden, Rodney Walkerley, Kent Karslake, et al. (Yes, I know the last three did not work for MotorSport!) had enormous credibility-they had been there! Nowadays when you open a motoring magazine it has some young wanker with green spiked hair "Test Driving" an historic racing car and writing about it with about as much credibility as I would have if I talked about a trip to the moon. Even that long streak of piss Tony Dron has credibility-he has been there and done that, maybe twenty, thirty years after the car was current but he is a qualified commentator.

One, quite prolific for a while, journalist with the initials BP commented after driving a 1939 Alvis four and a quarter for two days "One could hardly tell it was front wheel drive"!!! This was not admittedly in MotorSport but it is representative of the problem.

The solution? Beats me! Demand the best, do not purchase magazines that print trash, always let the editor/publisher know what you think of their product, submit your own work!

[humphries]

If it is any consolation, and it probably isn't, "Autosprint" did an article on the Maserati MC12 and referred to Maserati's glorious past. Unfortunately a photo captioned as a Maserati 300S driven by Fangio was a Ferrari! It seems that the editorial staff of all the motor sport magazines are just too young to know any better.

[oldtimer]

Originally posted by humphries
If it is any consolation, and it probably isn't, "Autosprint" did an article on the Maserati MC12 and referred to Maserati's glorious past. Unfortunately a photo captioned as a Maserati 300S driven by Fangio was a Ferrari! It seems that the editorial staff of all the motor sport magazines are just too young to know any better.

Too young to know any better, or can't be bothered to check? Or not allowed the time?

I have a sister who is well known in the Canadian school book publishing business as an editor. A couple of years ago she was turned down by a publishing house because her reputation had preceded her. "You are too thorough", she was told.

Therein lies one of the differences between now and when this casual reader was hooked by MotorSport in the early '50s. DSJ would have been in his early thirties and WB in his '40s. Hardly old, and since they virtually wrote all the copy, they were hardly able to coast.

What made MotorSport flourish in those days? Hardly playing to the big advertisers, since they fell under a mini-embargo by some major British firms for criticising British cars for some years. I doubt they did any market research. They just produced a darned good product for enthusiasts at a reasonable price, and if you weren't at the newspaper shop by the 2nd or 3rd of the month you missed your copy. And the stories that have leaked from the old Teesdale days suggest budgetting was more than well controlled.

Strict budgetting, advertising pressures, it was all there in those days. Competition too, with 3 well established weeklies in the UK plus an occasional monthly glossy. No internet, of course, but that's mostly as trivial as cotton candy.

Does the market slippage of MotorSport have more to do with slippage of the values needed to produce a quality product than the glib mantras of the marketing gurus? BTW, quality product does not mean glossy presentation, but something that captures the imagination of the reader. So much so in my case that it meant a special bus ride on the 1st of the month to the only newsagent in the city that carried MotorSport. Market profile that.

David, I hope this gives some answers to my rhetorical question about hooking a young enthusiast.

[David Birchall]

Thank you "Oldtimer"
I would think that in reality MotorSport has much more competition now than it did 20-30 years ago. "Classic Cars" and "Classic and Sportscar" fill a lot of the ground that MotorSport used to cover:-Whether we like the end result or not, they both have sizeable circulations. Other magazines have come foreward both in the UK and elsewhere. Certainly in n.america there are several magazines covering the "Vintage Racing" scene that were not there even ten years ago.
"Octane" seems just too slick and dealer oriented. My favourite was "Supercar Classics" which was a dreadful name for an excellent magazine. I still browse through my collection regularly.
I hope I havn't repeated anything posted by more informed and informative contributers than I.

[Racer.Demon]

Originally posted by David Birchall
Thank you "Oldtimer"
I would think that in reality MotorSport has much more competition now than it did 20-30 years ago.

I hadn't looked it that way before, but I also see a striking and depressing analogy with motorsport itself (the sport, not the magazine).

Most championships have much more competition from other championships than they did 20-30 years ago. Again here, the competition is marketing-driven, and again here, the end result is for the worse in terms of quality.

Yet another typical example is Jonathan Palmer's intention to run a rival British touring-car series "for the fans". S** off with all your rival championships and formulas and put your money and effort into a well-funded professional racing-car team to help make the existing championship better. FOR THE FANS.

Sorry to rant there, but those three words used by commercially inspired people wanting to sell their "package" make my blood boil...

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Racer.Demon


I hadn't looked it that way before, but I also see a striking and depressing analogy with motorsport itself (the sport, not the magazine).

Most championships have much more competition from other championships than they did 20-30 years ago. Again here, the competition is marketing-driven, and again here, the end result is for the worse in terms of quality.

Yet another typical example is Jonathan Palmer's intention to run a rival British touring-car series "for the fans". S** off with all your rival championships and formulas and put your money and effort into a well-funded professional racing-car team to help make the existing championship better. FOR THE FANS.

Sorry to rant there, but those three words used by commercially inspired people wanting to sell their "package" make my blood boil...

The one series that's used those three words - AND MEANT IT, as far as I can tell - is the ALMS. I think Don Panoz has a clear understanding of what both the committed and the casual sports car racing fan wants, and has been able to deliver it. (Well, apart from a bigger P1 grid ;))

[Twin Window]

Originally posted by Racer.Demon

Yet another typical example is Jonathan Palmer's intention to run a rival British touring-car series "for the fans". S** off with all your rival championships and formulas and put your money and effort into a well-funded professional racing-car team to help make the existing championship better. FOR THE FANS.

Word has it that he's about to do similar things to bike racing at Brands; and ironically it's supposedly 'for the fans' too...

Instead of running the hugely popular World Superbike round on the GP circuit next year, he's going to revive the Transatlantic Trophy. Great, but why not do both? The WSBK round is so huge these days it's more of a festival, it's that popular! Sure, the Flammini brothers are hard to deal with, but there's always middle ground to by found...

No Brands would leave us with just the Silverstone round, which is great - but Brands it ain't...

Twinny