rallying journalism sucks

[Finni]

Am I the only one who is wondering why journalists are not doing interesting and difficult questions in interviews? In current situation it seems like main rally journalists are out there to be "nice" and "correct" for all drivers and team-bosses. It's similar to journalism from communistic countries. Proper journalism should be interesting and straight to the point - even to the extent of being provocative.

If I was journalist I would ask not-so-nice questions like:

- Malcolm Wilson, your current young drivers are unable to challenge Loeb. Don't you think there is some other drivers like Marcus Grönholm or Petter Solberg who could do the job?

- Oliver Quesnel, Petter Solberg is continually hinting that his Xsara's engine is not powerful enough. Is it true that your rent cars are downgraded? What's hp difference between them and factory ones? Also is that car otherwise as good as the Xsara of 2006?

- Malcolm Wilson, are Stobart cars equal to factory cars of last year or are they intentionally downgraded?

[DuncanD]

Exactly, consider the coverage of the F1 we see on the BBC in the UK, 'difficult' questions are frequently during the interviews whilst the commentators are not afraid to criticize the governing body of the sport, rule changes and regulations. Basically it seems that the presenters and commentators are viewing the sport in the same way as us, they are not afraid to say if a race is a boring race (not a problem at the moment!)

Contrast this to the rallying coverage we see via Eurosport and Dave and it seems the presenters can only say good things about the sport, that they are in cohorts with the governing body. We are not stupid, they will say what an exciting rally even when there is very little competition in the field, there is never any critical mention of the number of teams and drivers competing or of any decisions taken by the governing body or event organisers, (think back to WRGB last year and imagine what an impartial commentator would have had to say about the cancellation of the stages on leg 1!).

Its more like watching an extended PR release than a report of an event!

[AndyRAC]

Exactly, consider the coverage of the F1 we see on the BBC in the UK, 'difficult' questions are frequently during the interviews whilst the commentators are not afraid to criticize the governing body of the sport, rule changes and regulations. Basically it seems that the presenters and commentators are viewing the sport in the same way as us, they are not afraid to say if a race is a boring race (not a problem at the moment!)

Contrast this to the rallying coverage we see via Eurosport and Dave and it seems the presenters can only say good things about the sport, that they are in cohorts with the governing body. We are not stupid, they will say what an exciting rally even when there is very little competition in the field, there is never any critical mention of the number of teams and drivers competing or of any decisions taken by the governing body or event organisers, (think back to WRGB last year and imagine what an impartial commentator would have had to say about the cancellation of the stages on leg 1!).

Its more like watching an extended PR release than a report of an event!

Basically, that is because the main coverage is done by the organisers - wrc.com, WRRadio - is ISC/North One owned, I think. They're not going to do anything to criticise the sport. This is quite wrong - they make out everything is rosy - it's not, it's pants! Not only that, but as I've said on another thread, they made the Rallycourse Annual an Official WRC Annual - therefore no proper analysis of were the sport is going wrong. Sadly, there aren't many media outlets to do this, especially here in UK.
Of all the Motorsport going on this weekend - F1, ALMS, LMS, BTCC, WSBK - guess which is the most predictable and an Non-event? Yeah, WRC!!

[Lousada]

Exactly, consider the coverage of the F1 we see on the BBC in the UK, 'difficult' questions are frequently during the interviews whilst the commentators are not afraid to criticize the governing body of the sport, rule changes and regulations. Basically it seems that the presenters and commentators are viewing the sport in the same way as us, they are not afraid to say if a race is a boring race (not a problem at the moment!)


The BBC pays Bernie millions so they can have an opinion. And even they can only go so far, just look at the witchhunt on Martin Brundle last year. Independent journalists can't afford to be critical because then their credential gets retracted which means they lose their job.

[N.O.T]

You cannot ask questions like these....they are too straightforward....and you might eventually get an answer that is also quite straightforward as well....

[JAM]

Only to have an ideia:

The contract between ISC / websites that attende to the events says that a website can only publish 2 reports a day of 1000 caracters each one, and can only publish 20 photos a day.

Is impossible to do a good report with these limitations, and everybody writes more than the contract permits... but is better no not do bad things otherwise the media credential can go away...

[awake27]

Regarding about some of the questions on the 1st post, it is not secret that the factory cars are better than those of the 2nd teams, privateer etc. Why a factory team will be willing to give their best machinery outside of their team? Does not make sense, thats why they are called factory teams. For example, if Solberg's Xsara was powerful and fast like the factory C4's why Citroen didn't stay with the Xsara's at the first place?

[AndyRAC]

Only to have an ideia:

The contract between ISC / websites that attende to the events says that a website can only publish 2 reports a day of 1000 caracters each one, and can only publish 20 photos a day.

Is impossible to do a good report with these limitations, and everybody writes more than the contract permits... but is better no not do bad things otherwise the media credential can go away...

That's clever of ISC - the WRC needs all the help it can get with regards to media coverage. Putting limitations on what can/can't be said is ridiculous. Maybe we get the sport we desrve then.

[BDunnell]

It is a very difficult situation. Journalists do have to be careful nowadays, because people are so obsessed with getting nothing but good PR and could very easily just withdraw accreditation, not allow interviews, etc, which then impacts severely on their ability to do the job and thus the content of their respective outlets. But the more journalistic way the BBC covers F1 - and, to be fair, the way ITV did it too, especially thanks to Martin Brundle - is of far more value.

Don't forget either that the WRC is of such low importance now that the reporters being used a lot of the time might not be seasoned pros, and therefore don't feel able to be as critical as, say, a Brundle or a Maurice Hamilton.

[JAM]

And another thing about the fact of not make dificult and unconfortable questions:

Anyone knows what happens when someone interviews Sebastien Loeb? The journalist and Loeb has a shadow very near. It seems that is trying to catch something that should not be told or writen. At least in Portugal it happened em 2007 and this year.

It's only an example, buts says very much about the attitude.

[BDunnell]

And another thing about the fact of not make dificult and unconfortable questions:

Anyone knows what happens when someone interviews Sebastien Loeb? The journalist and Loeb has a shadow very near. It seems that is trying to catch something that should not be told or writen. At least in Portugal it happened em 2007 and this year.

It's only an example, buts says very much about the attitude.

Such common practice in all walks of life, very sadly. It is now deemed so vital for the people being interviewed to toe the 'party line' that they must have a minder with them. It's pathetic.

[oreixa]

Makes often pay trips and hotels, lend cars, invite to eat to journalists... How they can bite the hand that feeds them?

[wrc_flipper]

Makes often pay trips and hotels, lend cars, invite to eat to journalists... How they can bite the hand that feeds them?

Agree with that, slightly. When you get an ISC Press Pass one (of many things) that you have to do is to be fair on your coverage to all teams and drivers. But when budgets are small the its quite easy to rely on the press releases from the teams. Asking difficult and challenging questions is needed but often don't get answered at the time due to timing constraints etc. Also I was once told that the driver is there to drive and the press guys are there for everything else.

But quite some interesting quesyions and answers from the press people at Rally Portugal this weekend to Max Mosely.

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wrc/2009/Pages/wrc_conference.aspx

[AndyRAC]

Agree with that, slightly. When you get an ISC Press Pass one (of many things) that you have to do is to be fair on your coverage to all teams and drivers. But when budgets are small the its quite easy to rely on the press releases from the teams. Asking difficult and challenging questions is needed but often don't get answered at the time due to timing constraints etc. Also I was once told that the driver is there to drive and the press guys are there for everything else.

But quite some interesting quesyions and answers from the press people at Rally Portugal this weekend to Max Mosely.

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/wrc/2009/Pages/wrc_conference.aspx

Yeah, the 'World Engine' - 'interesting' is the word I would use to describe that.

As for the media - in general, the media coverage of the WRC is basically rubbish. As far as UK goes, Jerry Williams likes putting the boot in, and almost every week in MNews. Martin Holmes is very good as well.
Does anybody know how many British journalists there are covering this sport - I can't imagine it's very many, especially compared to F1.

[jonkka]

Ever since major newspapers have begun to run stories straight from news bureaus rather than ones written by their own journalists, it doesn't surprise me at all that rally journos effectively print re-phrased team press releases.

[RS]

The TV is the same, at least here in the UK. Dave or Eurosport (ISC commentary) are often telling us how 'fantastic' Wilson's result is, no matter if he is 12 minutes off the pace.

[gloomyDAY]

Why doesn't someone ask why Henning's car seems to break down at every rally and leaves him down the order after Day 1? Really beginning to ride my nerves!

[Magnus]

It may be that rallying journalism sucks, but that doesn´t matter that much, me thinks. What do matter is ordinary journalists who, due to misunderstandings and misinformation and lack of interest causes big damages to "our" sport every year. They help building a piture of rallying in the society which differs quite a lot from the truth, not least when it comes to safety, the spirit of rallying, and environmental issues.

[PHD]

Why doesn't someone ask why Henning's car seems to break down at every rally and leaves him down the order after Day 1? Really beginning to ride my nerves!

I guess if they knew why, they would fix it!

When a driver seems to have continual problems compared to others using similar machinery, don't you always have to consider their level of mechanical sympathy?

I'm not being critical - I like Hennings slightly old school attitude and driving style, and his obvious enthusiasm. But maybe his technique doesn't suit WRC cars that are designed to be driven in a particular way?

What is needed is more interesting rallies, more manufacturers, less predictable results, more variety generally - not better journalists!