F1 on Channel 4

[Eric Mc]

The fact that TV companies feel the need to use people who obviously know little or nothing about a subject (not just in motor sport programming) seems to me to indicate a fundamental lack of confidence in their audience's knowledge and intelligence.

It permeates the whole of TV these days and is connected to the fact that most who work in TV ALSO know little or nothing about the subject matter of their programming. They assume their audience is as dumb and ignorant as they are.

In earlier times there was an assumption that those who were watching a TV programme about a certain subject were doing so because they were actually interested in the subject. And in most cases, those who made the programmes had some knowledge of the topic too.

[jbudgie]

Eric Mc said:

The fact that TV companies feel the need to use people who obviously know little or nothing about a subject (not just in motor sport programming) seems to me to indicate a fundamental lack of confidence in their audience's knowledge and intelligence.

It permeates the whole of TV these days and is connected to the fact that most who work in TV ALSO know little or nothing about the subject matter of their programming. They assume their audience is as dumb and ignorant as they are.

In earlier times there was an assumption that those who were watching a TV programme about a certain subject were doing so because they were actually interested in the subject. And in most cases, those who made the programmes had some knowledge of the topic too.

Spot on, Eric.

[Flooble]

I think you are totally correct, I even know a few "media" types who rather exemplify your theory.

However, I think they are simply catering to the younger demographic craved by advertisers. We have young graduates at work and the difference between them and even just 30-year olds is incredible. It's a constant battle to keep their attention focused. Anything more complicated than pressing a button and having things happen magically is a huge turn-off; they expect instant gratification and are not prepared to actually spend time learning (google is ever-present in their life).

[rubystone]

Eric Mc said:

The fact that TV companies feel the need to use people who obviously know little or nothing about a subject (not just in motor sport programming) seems to me to indicate a fundamental lack of confidence in their audience's knowledge and intelligence.

It permeates the whole of TV these days and is connected to the fact that most who work in TV ALSO know little or nothing about the subject matter of their programming. They assume their audience is as dumb and ignorant as they are.

In earlier times there was an assumption that those who were watching a TV programme about a certain subject were doing so because they were actually interested in the subject. And in most cases, those who made the programmes had some knowledge of the topic too.

Football, cricket, athletics...all eschew the fashion of using anchors who know sod all about the game. Perhaps only rugby with Inverdale is similar to F1, but at least he seems to understand the game. But which F1 personality could do a decent job of anchoring? Wattie, despite his boring voice is super-entertaining, shame that most of what he says is 'off-record' and generally laced with expletives.

[funkyrobot]

I don't know if something in my head has changed, but I'm finding Ben Edwards really, really annoying on C4.

I have followed his commentary for years and years. However, he seems (to me) to be extra shouty at the moment.

[Mr_Thyroid]

I think it's more to do with the 'live' aspect of the programme i.e. it is perceived to be easier to teach a presenter about F1 than it is to teach an F1 expert how to present live TV. I think this is probably true - the 'rabbit in the headlights' look that Mark Webber gets on his pieces is excruciating.

[amgmcqueen]

funkyrobot said:

I don't know if something in my head has changed, but I'm finding Ben Edwards really, really annoying on C4.

I have followed his commentary for years and years. However, he seems (to me) to be extra shouty at the moment.

Yes someone needs to tell him that raising his voice does not add excitement. He also seems to forget he is not on radio and people can see what is happening on screen. There is no need for him to talk continuously 'Bottas now coming round the final bend to start his flying lap, onto the start finish straight, drs open, braking hard into turn 1, little lockup, etc etc etc gahhhhh!

Him and Jones are the weak link's.

[T16OLE]

I wish they`d do the one hour highlights program. It takes me until about mid week to watch it now

[Flooble]

Just use fast forward - you know exactly when the gassing stops and the race starts so it's easy to skip to where you want and the race is a max of two hours, so a bit of 2x or 4x playback during the "tyre conservation phase" and you're down to your hour.

[ben5575]

Flooble said:

Just use fast forward - you know exactly when the gassing stops and the race starts so it's easy to skip to where you want and the race is a max of two hours, so a bit of 2x or 4x playback during the "tyre conservation phase" and you're down to your hour.

Agree entirely but a sad statement on the current state of F1. I can't remember the last time I actually watched a race in real time.

[Eric Mc]

Mr_Thyroid said:

I think it's more to do with the 'live' aspect of the programme i.e. it is perceived to be easier to teach a presenter about F1 than it is to teach an F1 expert how to present live TV. I think this is probably true - the 'rabbit in the headlights' look that Mark Webber gets on his pieces is excruciating.

I disagree. Many ex sporting stars have turned into excellent TV presenters. I would much prefer to have an ex-participant commentating or commenting than someone who has a degree in media studies or has gone through drama college.

Give Webber a bit more time and experience and he will be excellent.

[smash]

Just watched Sky coverage for first time. Ted Kravitz just described by the other half as being like an even more annoying Dale Winton (!). Plus Paul 'interesting' di Resta. And Tubby Herbert....

The one thing I've missed since BEEB is Mr Brundle but I don't think he's worth the price of admission alone. Like Crofty a lot.

Overall preferring C4 still....All IMHO

Edited by smash on Sunday 1st May 15:52

[ngdragon]

smash said:

Just watched Sky coverage for first time. Ted Kravitz just described by the other half as being like an even more annoying Dale Winton (!). Plus Paul 'interesting' di Resta. And Tubby Herbert....

The one thing I've missed since BEEB is Mr Brundle but I don't think he's worth the price of admission alone. Like Crofty a lot.

Overall preferring C4 still....All IMHO

Edited by smash on Sunday 1st May 15:52

I think di Resta is a huge weakness on Sky. Monotonous voice and appears completely devoid of personality. May be a good driver but certainly not cut out for media work. Dearly hope he's a temp stand in for Ant Davison who is excellent

[TedMaul]

no highlights on all4 app still? Coverage has been poor and difficult to find on catchup as shows in alphabetical order???

[scrwright]

Also watched my first Sky race today, during the race, better than C4, after, hmmm, PDR, whats that all about! watched for 30 mins or so then turned off, liked the TK notebook bit though

[cgt2]

It was pure comedy seeing that Croft trying to be controversial and getting slapped upside down verbally by Toto Wolff. Croft genuinely appeared to be surprised at the reaction but what did he expect making such stupid comments? Truly mind boggling.

It would be good to see more occasions where team personnel (who are on a different level of intelligence to those asking the questions) make it clear to such presenters that they will not stand for this kind of tabloid b***st.

[swisstoni]

cgt2 said:

It was pure comedy seeing that Croft trying to be controversial and getting slapped upside down verbally by Toto Wolff. Croft genuinely appeared to be surprised at the reaction but what did he expect making such stupid comments? Truly mind boggling.

It would be good to see more occasions where team personnel (who are on a different level of intelligence to those asking the questions) make it clear to such presenters that they will not stand for this kind of tabloid b***st.

Croft and a few other Sky folk seem a bit too pleased with themselves generally so a good old fashioned response occasionally won't do them any harm.

[rubystone]

cgt2 said:

It was pure comedy seeing that Croft trying to be controversial and getting slapped upside down verbally by Toto Wolff. Croft genuinely appeared to be surprised at the reaction but what did he expect making such stupid comments? Truly mind boggling.

It would be good to see more occasions where team personnel (who are on a different level of intelligence to those asking the questions) make it clear to such presenters that they will not stand for this kind of tabloid b***st.

Was that the part where Croft read out the 'controversial' tweets from moronic viewers?

[Likes Fast Cars]

rubystone said:

Was that the part where Croft read out the 'controversial' tweets from moronic viewers?

You haven't been at it again with those tweets have you?

[Wills2]

You can't blame the TV companies for going with an experienced presenter backed up with lots of experts, I'm not sure what people expect them to do? Things that look easy often aren't and being a presenter having to link it all together, understand what is going on and look/sound and project the feeling that you're known and comfortable within the F1 paddock ready to give the viewer the benefit of your inside knowledge (when you have very little) cannot be easy at all.

But they would make it easier on themselves if they had a pool of motorsport presenters but how many are there out there? Not many as today's TV presenters all have agents looking out for the BBD and they move from genre to genre, plus over the last few years the TV rights have stumbled around a bit, the rot set in when SKY took over and split what was an excellent team but nothing lasts for ever.

I quite like the current set up even Jones and he will get better over time if he stays, but then they've only got it for 3 years haven't they?