The poor quality of the journalism

[ioan]

I was reading the very recent autosport aricle about the "Cold Fuel" hearing, and the lack of logic in one of their phrases struck me.

Here it is:



Raikkonen won the drivers' title from 22-year-old rookie Hamilton by a single point but fuel samples from the three cars that finished ahead of Hamilton in that race were found to have used fuel that was cooler than the regulations allow.


http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63945

They should read what they write before posting it on their site. :down:

[fan-veteran]

Well, you are right. But what is the problem with the cooler fuel anyway in our days of refueling? A demand for a definite temperature of fuel was introduced in mid 80's when the fuel capacity was limited, there was no refueling and some teams started to use a very low temperature fuel to pour few kilograms more in the tank. Obviosly there is not any cryogenic equipment near the refueling equipment to lower the temperature puposefully.

[ArrowsFA1]

This really belongs in the The "Cold Fuel" saga continued (http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122917) thread, but...

The three cars that finished ahead of Hamilton (Rosberg, Kubica & Heidfeld) were found to have used fuel that was cooler than the regulations allow according to the FIA (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63557).

Here's an example of a rather misleading headline, also from Autosport:
McLaren lawyer seeks title for Hamilton (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63949)

No-where in the quotes from "McLaren's lawyer" (the appeal is being made on behalf of McLaren by the British governing body) is that specific outcome sought.

What Mr Mill does say is:

"The principle is clear. If there was a breach, it was performance-enhancing. The sanction, I'm afraid, has to be disqualification. I ask you to address this as though it was any team at any stage of the season. Whenever in the past there has been a disqualification, there has been a re-classification... All we ask you to do is what normally happens."

The result of the appeal, if the FIA accept Mr Mill's argument, might be that Hamilton is moved up the order.

However, Mill is incorrect to suggest that a re-classification is normal. Keke Rosberg was disqualified from the 1983 Brazilian GP for receiving a push start, but although Niki Lauda therefore "finished" 2nd he received the points for 3rd place.

[Andy65]

I seem to remember that Mclaren have been disqualified from this years championship but their drivers were not !!??

[ioan]

Do not turn this into a "cold fuel saga" thread, we already have one.

I started the thread just to talk about the poor quality of the articles we have to read from so called journalists!

[ioan]

This really belongs in the The "Cold Fuel" saga continued (http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122917) thread, but...

You should know better than any of us what to do in this case, obviously you ignored it! Pino won't be happy at about this! ;) :p :

[ArrowsFA1]

You should know better than any of us what to do in this case, obviously you ignored it!
:D

In my defence I would say that my post questioned why you thought one piece of journalism was poor, and explained my reasoning, then provided an example of my own, so I was sticking to what I assume the intention of your thread was...poor journalism.

It is, however, rather difficult to avoid discussing the issue both articles were about :crazy:

[SGWilko]

Do not turn this into a "cold fuel saga" thread, we already have one.

I started the thread just to talk about the poor quality of the articles we have to read from so called journalists!

Journalists = Chavs able to can read/write

[Sleeper]

I was reading the very recent autosport aricle about the "Cold Fuel" hearing, and the lack of logic in one of their phrases struck me.

Here it is:



http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63945

They should read what they write before posting it on their site. :down:
I fail to see anything wrong with that quote, the two BMW's and two Williams were both found to have fuel that was more than 10 degrees below the ambient tempreture, and therefore outside the rules.

Exactly how is this an example of bad writing?

[ioan]

I fail to see anything wrong with that quote, the two BMW's and two Williams were both found to have fuel that was more than 10 degrees below the ambient tempreture, and therefore outside the rules.

Exactly how is this an example of bad writing?

Than in your opinion the underlined part of that phrase is logical?!

[BDunnell]

I don't get what the point of complaining about that particular sentence is either, unless it's the fact that it omits to say in passing that Ferrari is the best F1 team in history or something like that...

[passmeatissue]

Than in your opinion the underlined part of that phrase is logical?!

I would like you to explain, too.

Not just the extra "the"?

[BDunnell]

Than in your opinion the underlined part of that phrase is logical?!

Ah, I see what you're getting at. It's such a minor complaint to make as to be pointless, in my view.

(For those who haven't realised, it seems to say that the fuel samples themselves used fuel, if you read it in a certain way. Not the best sentence, but not really worth comment.)

[ioan]

For me that's careless work.
They do not take the time to read what they wrote, before posting it on their site.

[passmeatissue]

Ah, I see what you're getting at. It's such a minor complaint to make as to be pointless, in my view.

(For those who haven't realised, it seems to say that the fuel samples themselves used fuel, if you read it in a certain way. Not the best sentence, but not really worth comment.)

Goodness gracious me!!!! Well with his immaculate prose I am not surprised ioan was outraged :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Could have used the "Cooler than Kimi" headline or others, but not anti-McLaren enough I suppose. What a thread.

[BDunnell]

For me that's careless work.
They do not take the time to read what they wrote, before posting it on their site.

It's about as worth a comment as the unnecessary second 'the' in the thread title.

[SGWilko]

It's about as worth a comment as the unnecessary second 'the' in the thread title.

Careful. Is Ioans first language English. If not then it is merely a 'lost in translation' thing. Nothing to nit pick about.

The second the could be because Ioan wants to highlight it is about F1 journalism, and not journalism in general.

Anyway, it did not bother me.

[ioan]

Careful. Is Ioans first language English. If not then it is merely a 'lost in translation' thing. Nothing to nit pick about.

The second the could be because Ioan wants to highlight it is about F1 journalism, and not journalism in general.

Anyway, it did not bother me.

You're right on both matters.
English isn't my first, nor 2nd and not even 3rd language, only 4th out of a few more! ;)

And what bothered me is that we, the fans, see F1 through the information that we get from mass media, especially journals in electronic form that we access using the internet.

If they aren't able to make a phrase that makes sense, and on top of that they don't read what they wrote before posting it, I feel I have the right to question the quality of their work.
And we do not talk about some new F1 site, we were talking about one of the best F1 sites.
These f1 news sites are even asking you to pay for their articles sometimes.
Well I want them to take their time before posting stupid sentences if they want my attention.

[SGWilko]

You're right on both matters.


Well **** me (as Gordon Ramsay would say), you agreed with me.

Thats twice off my chair in one day...........

;)

[ioan]

Well **** me (as Gordon Ramsay would say), you agreed with me.

Thats twice off my chair in one day...........

;)

Take care, buy a new chair, one with safety belts! :)

[SGWilko]

Take care, buy a new chair, one with safety belts! :)

:laugh:

[markabilly]

I wish I could find the direct exact quote but the first article I read, about the crisis meeting, said bernie had told the teams that "spying matters should be handled internally within the team..."

Now that would only make sense, as spying in the public view tends to be obvious, and/or if Mac had kept the spying of NS and MC completely and secretly "internal" then we would not have the fuss...... :rotflmao:

or maybe that is exactly what bernie told them and meant :eek:

[Sleeper]

Than in your opinion the underlined part of that phrase is logical?!
Wait, so you started a thread to complain about bad grammer! :rolleyes:

Were only three weeks into the off season and were already running out of ideas for new threads. :p

[Caroline]

Bad grammar is everywhere and the internet is its natural home. Journalists can post an article in a moment and placate the news/gossip hungry readers. I guess the fact that it can be edited after it has been read maybe means that sometimes articles aren't checked thoroughly. I mean, I usually post first, then check and edit :p

[Sleeper]

^Plus, mistakes will alwasy creep through once in a while, after all it is being written by humans, and people do make mistakes.

Off course, some people demand unreasonable perfection from others.

[ioan]

Wait, so you started a thread to complain about bad grammer! :rolleyes:

No. I didn't complain about grammar.
Why do you post in a thread you didn't bother to understand? :rolleyes:

[truefan72]

Ioan,

simply don't read from that journalist and avoid the headache
"We the F1 fans" literally have thousands of other places to get our information.

I fail to see the point of this thread other than to point out in an underhanded manner that the journalist seems to take a favorable Light on the McClaren situation.

Is that your real beef with this, one out of thousands of articles written about the matter?

[Sleeper]

No. I didn't complain about grammar.
Why do you post in a thread you didn't bother to understand? :rolleyes:
Well, you dont seem to be complaining about the content of the article, just the part you underlined for not making sense. Other than the fact that the word fuel is over used (a grammatical error as far as I know) I dont see a problem with it, and you have yet to explain, like I asked you in my first post, what thet problem is. If its not the grammer, the WTF is it, and lets stop going round in circles.

I don't get what the point of complaining about that particular sentence is either, unless it's the fact that it omits to say in passing that Ferrari is the best F1 team in history or something like that...

In Autosport??????

Not while there is still breath in Nigel 'I love Mclaren, Ron can do no wrong, oh, did I mention Gilles in this sentence?' Roebuck's body.

It would be nice though.

[ioan]

Well, you dont seem to be complaining about the content of the article, just the part you underlined for not making sense. Other than the fact that the word fuel is over used (a grammatical error as far as I know) I dont see a problem with it, and you have yet to explain, like I asked you in my first post, what thet problem is. If its not the grammer, the WTF is it, and lets stop going round in circles.

Using a word several times doesn't make it a grammatical error. And as far as I know an idiotic phrase is no grammatical error either.
That phrase has no logic, no sense. If someone didn't know about the issues before reading this article it wouldn't have understood what exactly happened.

Also I would appreciate if journalists that write for a subscription based news site would double check what they write.

I hope I made myself clear.

[Sleeper]

Using a word several times doesn't make it a grammatical error. And as far as I know an idiotic phrase is no grammatical error either.
That phrase has no logic, no sense. If someone didn't know about the issues before reading this article it wouldn't have understood what exactly happened.

Also I would appreciate if journalists that write for a subscription based news site would double check what they write.

I hope I made myself clear.
I beleive unecessary repetition does come under a grammatical error, buts thats besides the point. And that phrase made plenty of sense to me, maybe it could ave been worded a bit better, but idiotic, no.

[ioan]

Let's agree to disagree.
We are just losing our time, that's sure.

[ArrowsFA1]

It's hard to know whether this is an example of poor journalism, or Ecclestone realising he'd said something he shouldn't and retracting it, but it is an example of how a story can potentially set off a chain reaction. A later denial is almost irrelevant (even if true) because the "story" is out there.

Ecclestone: McLaren may get points penalty (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64138) (28/11/07)

Ecclestone denies McLaren penalty quotes (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64170) (29/11/07)

[I am evil Homer]

As a former journo I'll chime in :) There's immense pressure to get stories especially in the off season when really it's all guess work, "sources close to the deal" stories etc. The internet also places huge pressure on getting news out in a timely manner.

But they do it because fans like you and me are clamouring for news when there's very little else to talk about.

As for Bernie...well he should really stay quiet either that or realise by now there's no such thing as "off the record" when you talk to journalists!!"

[ArrowsFA1]

As a former journo I'll chime in :)
Thanks for adding your perspective :up: You're certainly right about the internet creating added pressure. It's a view that Ron Dennis expressed not so long ago, but of course got heavily criticised for.

It's a shame that "off the record" comments are not treated as such any more in many (most?) quarters. They used to be used to add to a story without breaking any confidences, but now it seems as if they are seen as the story.