Do we have "autosport" bashing thread already?

Post anything that doesn't belong in any other forum, including gaming and topics unrelated to motorsport. Site specific discussions should go in the site feedback forum.

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:27 pm

I think the way titles are presented on their front page is hilarious -

Image
timbo
 
Joined: 22 Oct 2007

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:28 pm

mind elaborating on this?
失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:34 pm

raymondu999 wrote:mind elaborating on this?

+1

I see this all the time in news websites. The same article having 2 seperate titles. The main one is usually dis-similar to the one you're reading. They may also have excerpts under the headline that aren't in the article or are buried deep within it.

What does the title of this thread have to do with the topic? :wink:
"It could be done manually. It would take quite a while, but it could be done. There is however a much more efficient and accurate way of getting the data. Men with lasers." Wing Commander Andy Green
roost89
 
Joined: 10 Apr 2008
Location: Highlands, Scotland

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:43 pm

I've always disliked that two title thing as well as when they make two articles out of an interview; they post the normal interview and then make and article out of it by removing the formal questions. :roll:

And yes, an autosport bashing thread already exists: AutoSport... Becoming Sadly Compromised Rag?

But this one is just fine. :)
Forum guide: read before posting

Join the chatroom during GP weekends!

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen
mx_tifoso
 
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Location: North America

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:46 pm

Well, IMO there's tiny bit difference between "confident" and "hopes".

I don't like that, especially as autosport seems to have the most reliable sources and is kinda like "official" news channel for F1.
timbo
 
Joined: 22 Oct 2007

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 7:10 pm

timbo wrote:Well, IMO there's tiny bit difference between "confident" and "hopes".

I don't like that, especially as autosport seems to have the most reliable sources and is kinda like "official" news channel for F1.

I think you are absolutely right. There needs to be some kind of journalistic accountability when it comes to this. "Confident" and "Hopes" are very different and may lead to misunderstandings.
jddh1
 
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Location: New York City

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:16 pm

Image
Those who believe in telekinetics raise my hand
Mr Alcatraz
 
Joined: 18 May 2008
Location: San Diego Ca. USA

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:18 pm

journalistic accountability ?

that's an oxymoron , isn't it ?
to the optimist a glass is half full ; to the pessimist a glass is half empty ; to the F1 engineer the glass is twice as big as it needs to be
lebesset
 
Joined: 6 Aug 2008

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 10:51 pm

I think Autosport are pretty good to be honest, MXtifosi touched on the fact they regurgitate the same interview and spin it a few times. But thats the news media for you.

Can I suggest we have a Crash.net bashing thread? where to begin with that place :twisted:
More could have been done.
David Purley
JohnsonsEvilTwin
 
Joined: 29 Jan 2010
Location: SU 419113

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 10:55 pm

Mentioning Crash.net will most definately open one of these!

Image

#-o
andrew
 
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Post Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:58 pm

It's like a drug dealer cutting up cocaine and buffing it up to increase the amount. :lol:
It's the same story with a few words juggled around. Pf1 does this a lot too.
Cooking up, chopping, screwing and rehashing to increase the volume of stories on the page, desperate times call for desperate measures i tell you.
For Sure!!
ringo
 
Joined: 29 Mar 2009

Post Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:27 am

They are too big to be writing articles based on someone's statement without checking the integrity of the statement and the one who made it.

They should quote the statement and than add their own analysis and opinion based on investigation and professional expertise of their journalists.

That's what journalism is all about. If you're just pasting statements, than you don't need to hire a single journalist. That's a franchise propaganda, not a journalism.

Image
manchild
 
Joined: 3 Jun 2005

Post Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:26 am

Manchild very true,

However I feel that F1fanatic have the balance right between News/expert opinion.
Honorable mentions should also go out to James Allen on F1 and Auto Motor und Sport, both great and realiable resources for an F1 fan.

Andrew
Im now fully banned from crash.net :lol: This for Pointing out to the "keyboard warrior" that changing wheelbase dimensions in season of Homologated tubs is not easy, And that Schumacher did indeed race in DTM.

He is either a moderator or is "noshing" a moderator off! :wtf:
More could have been done.
David Purley
JohnsonsEvilTwin
 
Joined: 29 Jan 2010
Location: SU 419113

Post Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:02 am

Alonso warns Hamilton to tidy up his driving
http://www.espn.co.uk/formula1/sport/st ... MP=OTC-RSS

This title is absurdly misleading.
It's not even a newsworthy interview.
Total Rubbish IMO :roll:
Slow news day :wink:
Those who believe in telekinetics raise my hand
Mr Alcatraz
 
Joined: 18 May 2008
Location: San Diego Ca. USA

Post Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:09 am

Here's a prime example of my previously stated gripe. Two interviews, one with Webber and another one with Sauber; Webber's get two spin-off articles while Sauber luckily just gets one.

And there are two separate articles about the new Silverstone layout. :roll:

Image

Labeled by colours. :mrgreen:
Forum guide: read before posting

Join the chatroom during GP weekends!

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen
mx_tifoso
 
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Location: North America

Next

Return to Off topic chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests