F1technical.net

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

mind elaborating on this?

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?

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.

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

But this one is just fine.

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 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.

journalistic accountability ?

that's an oxymoron , isn't it ?

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

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

It's like a drug dealer cutting up cocaine and buffing it up to increase the amount.
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.

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.

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 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!

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
Slow news day

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.



Labeled by colours.