F1 Media

[Crafty_]

I've had a grumble about Sky this year trying to hype up animosity at Mercedes, from what I understand BBC are up to the same thing.
In general the F1 media circus has gone downhill, trying to create drama and scandal where there isn't any.
A good example is the whole "Vettel to Mercedes!!! ZOMG!" thing this weekend. Some hack suggests that Mercedes could be interested in Vettel, it wasn't really confirmed or denied by anyone but the media start running around asking anyone they can, including the current Merc drivers.. I mean, really what are they meant to say ? Its stupid, tabloid journalism because they can't think up anything interesting or insightful to write about.

This weekend Horner put them in their place a bit after continually being asked about F1 race locations and human rights records and if F1 should go to these locations: http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/f1/93...

I'm far from being a fan of Horner, but he's got this right. They are getting lazy and want to try and create the next scandal headline instead of actually concentrate on the sport.

Kevin Eason (The Times) tweeted that Horner "Christian Horner loses it spectacularly in the FIA after repeated questions about finances and racing in Russia". So trying to create a scandal again!

Then there was this :

Press Conference said:

Q: (Ralf Bach - Sport Bild) So we learn now that we are going to Azerbaijan. We drove in Bahrain, everybody knows that Bahrain is killing their own people. We go to Russia and no comment. We drove in China, China is not very famous for democracy I heard. So my question is: all you guys say that you have a Formula One and drivers and everybody has to make a good example for young people. Do you think it's a good example to follow Mr Ecclestone everywhere he wants? Next question is when he would go to North Korea, would you follow him?

Vijay Mallya: I think we're racing people, more popularly known as petrolheads. We come here to race and to win and to enjoy it. The governance is an international organisation called the FIA. It is up to the FIA to decide where the sport is conducted. I don't think that the teams, individual participants in the sport, should be holding their individual positions to determine social political issues that you have raised. The FIA is perfectly competent to determine where Formula One should be staged and not be staged.

Q: Anything more to add? Do you all agree with that? No more to add? So the question is you would follow Ecclestone to North Korea or you wouldn't?

Vijay Mallya: You know, it's a not question of following Bernie. I think the question has been wrongly framed. It's the commercial rights holder, it's the FIA. We race where they stage the events. It's as simple as that.

Boullier has since requested that Bach's FIA press accreditation be removed. I guess the Bahrain comment doesn't go down well in Woking. Nevetheless its a bit of a crass line of questioning.

Do they all need a good kick up the arse ?

[Vaud]

They are press, trying to create a good headline "F1 would race in North Korea" etc.

The only place I had seen this is in your quote - so I guess the wider F1 media does a pretty good self filtering at times?

I think they need better journalists, there are some stars who report facts and good analysis (e.g. Joe Saward) but the wider press is poor in my view.

[johnfm]

Perfectly valid line of questioning.

At what point do those managing F1 take account of ethics and politics when determining where to race.

[Crafty_]

johnfm said:

Perfectly valid line of questioning.

At what point do those managing F1 take account of ethics and politics when determining where to race.

Horner's whole point was ask those who are managing F1, not TPs, who do not manage the sport.

[johnfm]

Crafty_ said:

johnfm said:

Perfectly valid line of questioning.

At what point do those managing F1 take account of ethics and politics when determining where to race.

Horner's whole point was ask those who are managing F1, not TPs, who do not manage the sport.

"I was just following orders" can only go so far.

At some point I think the 'North Korea' question will need an answer - clearly NK is a reductio ad absurdam argument; but recent issues with Russia/Ukraine and passenger jets have sharpened the debate.

[Chrisgr31]

I certainly think it is right that the media are questioning whether F1 should be going to Russia, Bahrain, Baku and any other country with a poor human rights record, and in my view the teams are just hiding behind Bernie and the FIA.

They do have a problem as they sign up to take part in the race series etc but they should not just accept that they will go wherever they get sent by Bernie and the FIA, and I would hope they are making representations behind the scenes. The reality is going to countries with doubtful human rights, with alleged involvement of downing of a civilian jet etc is going to make sponsors reconsider their involvement.

The FIA and Bernie need the teams, well most of them anyway, more than the teams need Bernie and the FIA. If the fans are querying race location decisions the teams certainly should be.

However on the subject of the F1 media just stirring up stories particularly between the drivers etc I do agree the OP has a point.

[Crafty_]

johnfm said:

"I was just following orders" can only go so far.

At some point I think the 'North Korea' question will need an answer - clearly NK is a reductio ad absurdam argument; but recent issues with Russia/Ukraine and passenger jets have sharpened the debate.

Why does the "North Korea" question need an answer ? is there a race proposed there ? is it on the calendar / has anyone mentioned NK ?
Certainly not that I'm aware of.

The media are asking questions of the teams about all this stuff but have they asked Bernie ? CVC ? The FIA ? If they are, they aren't reporting it. Laziness again ? too easy to wander in to the team press conference and throw questions out instead of putting some effort in ?

[RYH64E]

Crafty_ said:

Do they all need a good kick up the arse ?

I thought your view was 'If you don't like it, don't watch/read it'?

[Vaud]

Chrisgr31 said:

I certainly think it is right that the media are questioning whether F1 should be going to Russia, Bahrain, Baku and any other country with a poor human rights record, and in my view the teams are just hiding behind Bernie and the FIA.

Baku is a city, not a country. Azerbaijan is not the greatest human rights record, but then where do you draw the line?

Do all sports have to make a moral judgement as well for where the compete? Who sets the line of "go" or "no go"?

Many different ways of cutting the stats - mostly qualitative judgements.

One example:
http://www.worldaudit.org/democracy.htm

Maybe we should only let F1 visit the top 10 countries? Thats Japan, UK, German, US, Austria and Hungary gone for a start. Italy is more corrupt than many. Singapore? Mexico?

I don't disagree with the point that F1 needs to be careful, but nor do I think we should be selective in thinking that the current countries that are never raised as "countries with questionable human rights" should have the same judgements applied. Take Japan as a good example. On the face of it nice, organised, polite. Has the death penalty. Poor prisons and very questionable justice system.

Maybe F1 shouldn't go anywhere with the death penalty? Or anywhere without press freedoms? Or any country that has recently invaded another country or has a disputed territories? So where would that leave the UK with the Falklands, Spain with it's Moroccan enclaves? The US with it's incursions to Iraq, etc?

Moral ambition is fine until it hits the real world. If you start moralising too much, we'd have the Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, New Zealand and Swiss GPs and that's it.

[Crafty_]

I think if you look close enough anywhere is up for scrutiny, The US and Guantanamo for example.

Raising the issue is fine, but continually throwing the same old questions around in the hope of a juicy comment is lazy.

[Vaud]

Crafty_ said:

I think if you look close enough anywhere is up for scrutiny, The US and Guantanamo for example.

Raising the issue is fine, but continually throwing the same old questions around in the hope of a juicy comment is lazy.

Agreed and damn you. This is about the 4th time in 4 threads I've had to agree with you. I thought we all want to argue...

[johnfm]

Crafty_ said:

johnfm said:

"I was just following orders" can only go so far.

At some point I think the 'North Korea' question will need an answer - clearly NK is a reductio ad absurdam argument; but recent issues with Russia/Ukraine and passenger jets have sharpened the debate.

Why does the "North Korea" question need an answer ? is there a race proposed there ? is it on the calendar / has anyone mentioned NK ?
Certainly not that I'm aware of.

The media are asking questions of the teams about all this stuff but have they asked Bernie ? CVC ? The FIA ? If they are, they aren't reporting it. Laziness again ? too easy to wander in to the team press conference and throw questions out instead of putting some effort in ?

The quotes around North Korea and my reference to reduction ad absurd am should give you a clue. I know there is no race in North Korea. It does;t matter, as it is a hypothetical scenario. The point being that there are new races on the calendar in places that have dodgy records of governance (and, worse, virtually zero F1 following).

The news of Briatore begin brought in suggests that F1 is realising it is becoming a bit of a circus.

[Crafty_]

Vaud said:

Agreed and damn you. This is about the 4th time in 4 threads I've had to agree with you. I thought we all want to argue...

No we don't etc etc

johnfm said:

The quotes around North Korea and my reference to reduction ad absurd am should give you a clue. I know there is no race in North Korea. It does;t matter, as it is a hypothetical scenario. The point being that there are new races on the calendar in places that have dodgy records of governance (and, worse, virtually zero F1 following).

The news of Briatore begin brought in suggests that F1 is realising it is becoming a bit of a circus.

So we're in to the "what ifs"?
What if British soldiers are found guilty of war crimes in Afghanistan/Iraq etc ? What if the UK Government of the time knew ?
What about going to the US given things that happen in Vietnam etc ?

We could go on all day along those lines.

Briatore is being brought in on the sporting side, nothing to do with locations, logistics etc. If anything if he gets his way it'll become more of a circus - but thats pretty much unrelated to the media thing or where CVC/FIA put races.

[johnfm]

Crafty_ said:

Vaud said:

Agreed and damn you. This is about the 4th time in 4 threads I've had to agree with you. I thought we all want to argue...

No we don't etc etc

johnfm said:

The quotes around North Korea and my reference to reduction ad absurd am should give you a clue. I know there is no race in North Korea. It does;t matter, as it is a hypothetical scenario. The point being that there are new races on the calendar in places that have dodgy records of governance (and, worse, virtually zero F1 following).

The news of Briatore begin brought in suggests that F1 is realising it is becoming a bit of a circus.

So we're in to the "what ifs"?
What if British soldiers are found guilty of war crimes in Afghanistan/Iraq etc ? What if the UK Government of the time knew ?
What about going to the US given things that happen in Vietnam etc ?

We could go on all day along those lines.

Briatore is being brought in on the sporting side, nothing to do with locations, logistics etc. If anything if he gets his way it'll become more of a circus - but thats pretty much unrelated to the media thing or where CVC/FIA put races.

Now you are relying on an absurd argument. If you think a handful of soldiers being found guilty of war crimes is equivalent to Russia providing the missiles that shot down a passenger plane or Russia's general record on 'democracy' you need to read more.

I think it is pretty obvious that, despite its record in Vietnam or Central America or the Middle East, that the US is not renown for its oppression of its own people in the same way as, say, Syria, Bahrain, Egypt and so on. Clearly, it is nuanced and there are some like you who think that sport and politics should be separate - people used similar arguments in respect to cricket in South Africa years ago.

I have no particularly strong view - other than the teams should not be immune from questions about where they will draw the line.

[The Hypno-Toad]

johnfm said:

The news of Briatore begin brought in suggests that F1 is realising it is becoming a bit of a circus.

So they recruit the biggest red-nosed clown who ever wandered through the paddock to change things. A man is who is not only in the back pocket of the Ringmaster but was supposedly chucked out of the sport for life for race fixing.

As I mentioned on another thread, genius.

There is only one thing that will stop the media asking awkward questions & that's if the teams, the manufacturers and sponsors get the balls to get rid of the people at the top who are causing all the problems.

[eccles]

Horner could have turned the question around to all those many journalists.....Would you report on the race if it was held in North Korea?

[Chrisgr31]

Vaud said:

Baku is a city, not a country. Azerbaijan is not the greatest human rights record, but then where do you draw the line?

Do all sports have to make a moral judgement as well for where the compete? Who sets the line of "go" or "no go"?

Many different ways of cutting the stats - mostly qualitative judgements.

One example:
http://www.worldaudit.org/democracy.htm

Maybe we should only let F1 visit the top 10 countries? Thats Japan, UK, German, US, Austria and Hungary gone for a start. Italy is more corrupt than many. Singapore? Mexico?

I don't disagree with the point that F1 needs to be careful, but nor do I think we should be selective in thinking that the current countries that are never raised as "countries with questionable human rights" should have the same judgements applied. Take Japan as a good example. On the face of it nice, organised, polite. Has the death penalty. Poor prisons and very questionable justice system.

Maybe F1 shouldn't go anywhere with the death penalty? Or anywhere without press freedoms? Or any country that has recently invaded another country or has a disputed territories? So where would that leave the UK with the Falklands, Spain with it's Moroccan enclaves? The US with it's incursions to Iraq, etc?

Moral ambition is fine until it hits the real world. If you start moralising too much, we'd have the Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, New Zealand and Swiss GPs and that's it.

I know Baku is a city not a country but I knew how to spell the city but not the country and couldn't be bothered to look it up!

If F1 only visited the top 10 countries you's only have 10 races, so you'd have to make it 20 or 22 countries!

Of course a difference between some rac locations and others is that in the traditional race locations there is often no or a limited link between the rulers of the country and the race circuit and therefore the country's rulers are not seeking to use F1 to show themselves in a good light. In some of the newer locations rulers are using F1 as a propaganda tool, and I guess thats where the issue lies.

[Vaud]

Chrisgr31 said:

If F1 only visited the top 10 countries you's only have 10 races, so you'd have to make it 20 or 22 countries!

Of course a difference between some rac locations and others is that in the traditional race locations there is often no or a limited link between the rulers of the country and the race circuit and therefore the country's rulers are not seeking to use F1 to show themselves in a good light. In some of the newer locations rulers are using F1 as a propaganda tool, and I guess thats where the issue lies.

I'll ask again, how do you decide? Would Singapore be in or out? Japan? What moral code would you use?

[team underdog]

eccles said:

Horner could have turned the question around to all those many journalists.....Would you report on the race if it was held in North Korea?

Exactly right. The F1 media ARE part of the circus and they too will go to wherever the races are for the same reasons as the teams.

People in glass houses...

Edited to add - it's far easier for a journalist (if you can call some that) to turn down a race on the grounds of morality/beliefs/politics whatever they choose. It's far harder for a team principal to make that call when they represent 500+ employees, a portfolio of sponsors and shareholder all of different nationalities and cultures etc. Oh and you have a contract with Bernie which it turns out he's not that favourable if you breach!!

Edited by team underdog on Monday 28th July 13:17

[Chrisgr31]

Vaud said:

I'll ask again, how do you decide? Would Singapore be in or out? Japan? What moral code would you use?

Well the same moral code that the man in the street would adopt. You'd struggle to find people who would say F1 should not go to Singapore or Japan, but you'd struggle to find someone who thinks they should go to Russia!