1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Bensonballs

Discussion in 'Formula 1' started by Mr.B, May 31, 2016.

  1. Mr.B

    Mr.B Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2014
    Messages:
    333
    Likes Received:
    535
    I should have posted this in the Monaco GP thread, but that one has just ascended into some good discussions about overtaking, track design etc. I don't want to derail it.

    Maybe this thread can become a treasure trove of Benson articles for us all to enjoy at any time.

    Anyway, to paraphrase the man's own headline, Andrew Benson shows difference between a good & grate writer. (Yes, I did mean "grate")

    'Lewis Hamilton shows difference between a good & great driver' - http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/36409542

     
    #1
    Last edited: May 31, 2016
    Smithers and cosicave like this.
  2. El_Bando

    El_Bando Can't remember, where was I?
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    14,374
    Likes Received:
    1,830
    Benson was particularly sickly this weekend. He must have been staying in a place opposite Hamilton's flat.
     
    #2
  3. SgtBhaji

    SgtBhaji Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    14,403
    Likes Received:
    5,570
    Bloody hell... I never read this blokes stuff but went ahead and read that. What an absolute load of guff! That is just one massive cringe.

    Why do you all read this stuff? :D
     
    #3
    El_Bando and cosicave like this.
  4. JonnyBaws

    JonnyBaws Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    5,345
    Likes Received:
    717
    Now Sky are reeling out "Hamilton's" best drives....
    It's his first win in 9 races.. granted he drove an aggressive strategy and done very well, but had it not been for the RB Cock-up, he'd have been 2nd at best..
    The likes of Sky and the Beeb don't have like feeding the Hamilton Uber fans..
    I'll admit, I like the racer too.. but wouldn't go OTT about him!
     
    #4
  5. cosicave

    cosicave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    660
    I recently saw a link to Benson here in this forum, early in the Monaco Grand Prix thread. Had it not been for that, I'd have been unaware of the blatant bias his supposedly public-serving employers are allowing. Their 'F1 correspondent' gushes with a myopic disregard for subtleties which might otherwise make an F1 article authoritative – but then, the BBC's evident lack of interest in motor sport since selling out on a commitment made to the British public suggests the powers-that-be couldn't give two hoots, whilst cricket is so important it makes regular appearances in the national news!

    I just clicked your link,
    Mr B. Thanks. I can scarcely believe it. It seemed to me that Benson had reached his own zenith (substitute appropriate body part) with the Ham-focussed crap he produced after Monaco Practice 1 on Thursday; but with this latest he has actually upstaged himself! … However, it isn't even funny. Not only does he talk up his apparent idol; he assassinates the one and only driver perceived as a threat to the outcome he clearly hopes for! If this appeared in any reasonably balanced forum, it would surely be ridiculed as a wind-up – and I doubt it would be defended by the even the most avid Hamilton supporter!

    But the bottom line is that this little doggie has been allowed too long a leash from its owner – an owner that doesn't give enough of a crap to clear up its mess and thinks members of the public won't notice…
     
    #5
    EternalMSC likes this.
  6. eddie_squidd

    eddie_squidd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,701
    Likes Received:
    2,332
    He is writing for a market. The editorial angle in the BBC and, from what I can gather it may be even worse at Sky, is that British fans are watching and British fans are only interested in lionising a British driver, whether he is winning or not. It is misguided of course, but it is pandering to the lowest common denominator. It is essentially like football reporting where nationalism is not questioned. So far from it being a problem of editors not being aware or letting him too far off the leash I think it is a case of this being an editorial stance which is the precise reason why Benson is employed specifically to write in this way. While we might like to think this misunderstands the market totally, a quick scan of most forums where Formula One is discussed (as opposed to Formula One forums) shows they are full of exactly this sort of partisan and nationalistic rhetoric (bias is not strong enough a word) so they would probably consider that their approach is what most people want.
     
    #6
    cosicave likes this.
  7. cosicave

    cosicave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    660
    Yes, Eddie. I agree. You've also raised a valid and interesting point.

    My point is that I believe the BBC and its F1 correspondent are misjudging the market for F1 readership precisely because of the way the BBC propagandises itself as an 'authoritative' body, thus promoting a sense of expectation (by design) that what it produces for public consumption is relatively objective. This reasoning has always been sold(sic) as key to Auntie's existence and underpins its stance on advertising as vital to impartiality. This deliberately presents the notion of a lack of bias, thus making it is reasonable for the public to expect at least a decent attempt at objectivity – as opposed to the expected partisan nature of the 'tabloid' press which relies upon polarised opinion in order to sell itself. The BBC is
    supposed to be different. It sets itself up as an impartial authority, yet, as seen in Benson's rhetoric is actually feeding partisan ignorance, just like the tabloid stuff it claims to distance itself from.

    The BBC promotes itself as THE place to find the greatest objectivity, by virtue of promoting its own space as one with no axe to grind. This is why it is missing an opportunity: it could – and according to its own remit
    should – produce informative articles which not only present the most salient facts but also delve into subtleties and technicalities associated with those interested in F1; the very same people who are sufficiently interested to visit the site to be further informed about it.

    By contrast, opinion expressed in an f1 forum tends to polarise due to the sense of immediacy and the reactionary nature of contributors – which quickly establishes an expected norm – although of course, some are better than others; but significantly, those visiting F1 fora are likely to have interest above that of a casual passer-by. However, a leading article from some authoritative source is seen as a statement
    rather than a debate in itself regardless of whether it allows feedback which most, including the article's author(!), will likely not be interested in enough to read even if they find it. Again, this is quite different to a forum where virtually all readers expect a combination of informative and misguided debate rather than one leading statement to such extent that the tendency is to actively seek out opinion.

    The current stance taken by the BBC is not only unnecessary; it undermines its own justification for its own existence.
     
    #7
    DHCanary likes this.
  8. eddie_squidd

    eddie_squidd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,701
    Likes Received:
    2,332
    I agree with all of this, the trouble is I would say that probably the BBC would not regard Formula One Forums (in capital letters) like this one as being the largest part of the public discussion of Formula 1, and they are probably right. I would say Facebook or Twitter are the places online where the most debate happens, hence my distinction between Formula 1 forums and forums where Formula 1 is discussed. I unfortunately do have a Facebook account, and I follow both Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg on it. Their feeds are exactly what you would expect: Hamilton's is all moody instagram photos and motivational quotes, and the readers' comments are almost exclusively along the lines of "You tha man Lewis, let's win this champ" and Nico's is usually pictures of him driving his vintage Mercedes Pagoda with an expensive watch on and with nice hair, and the replies, a high proportion of which are from ladies, saying what a gentleman he is and how he will beat Hamilton who is horrible and gaudy and a bad sportsman, and a few replies from Hamilton fans saying "How does it feel to be second best hurr hurr". Unfortunately it is to that end of social media that the BBC and Sky are aiming their editorial focus. You could argue that it is the job of the BBC to educate and inform and to raise the debate, or you can argue that it is the job of the BBC to address themselves to the largest and most important group of licence fee payers. I know what I think, and it's probably the same as you, but I can also understand why they might disagree. Does the serious F1 fan read the BBC coverage for the most in-depth reporting or would they read Autosport or another more specialist site? If a serious F1 fan reads the BBCs columns they might do so for the odd insight but at the same time knowing what their bias is and understanding that it is mainly written for the casual, more partisan, reader.
     
    #8
  9. cosicave

    cosicave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    5,277
    Likes Received:
    660
    Once again, I see your point, Ed.

    I hope you'll forgive my singling out of part of your post above. I am well aware of being somewhat purist in highlighting the BBC's remit and I think you are quite correct that in all likelihood the "serious F1 fan" will be aware of BBC bias and that it may well be written for the casual reader. But the point is that the BBC has no remit to be biased and should not deliberately seek to patronise its ignorant (and necessarily coerced) licence payers, since this very medium
    is the power through which such ignorance is maintained – or not! Maintaining ignorance is the opposite to education. And if the BBC seeks to be nationalistic – which might otherwise justify its current rhetoric – it should not set out to promote the idea that it is objective.

    The two concepts are at odds with one another. Either it is the authority it propagandises itself as, or it is not. If it is the former, it must emphasise its objectivity for that is what imbues it with authority; and if the latter, it is hoodwinking a deliberately subdued public whilst telling them it is in their interest!

    The BBC chooses all manner of minority topics to promote with a disregard for ratings, deliberately appealing to a perceived élite or those who might aspire to such. I think this is to be praised (although not through song, I might add ;) ) and examples are easy to find amongst its more cultural efforts. Indeed, the argument might be extended to the excellent natural history and scientific stuff, even if the latter has more recently become watered down with drama – which of course is not scientific
    *.

    The fact that the BBC produces excellence for some
    ** minority audiences is evidence that the BBC does not primarily exist to be 'popular'. – It may hope to be, of course, but this should be a natural by-product of quality – its own quality – as was always claimed as justification for its existence as an extension of British governance in the first place; and is still the propagandised reason behind the licence fee.
    - - -o0o- - -

    *Perhaps this is another example of over-patronising a perceived viewer-ship?
    **Hmm, how about F1? Maybe full coverage is no longer viable even though previously mandated through its own contract; but I see no reason why the BBC cannot find the little bit of cash necessary to pay proper respect to this minority sport – even if it chooses to maintain 'popular' headlines through Benson…
     
    #9
  10. Mr.B

    Mr.B Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2014
    Messages:
    333
    Likes Received:
    535
    I'm a bit remote from the Beeb, having lived in New Zealand for the last 8 years. There's no equivalent of the BBC here, and it leaves much more of a void than you'd think. To be fair, with a small population and no compulsory license fee, New Zealand broadcasters are very limited in the kinds of shows they can produce or buy.

    But still, for context...
    New Zealand's terrestrial TV channels are heavily filled with 'reality' programmes, both locally produced (Masterchef NZ, The Block NZ etc), and imported (various police chase, auction hunter, embarrassing bodies, truckers etc). Some of the local (Australian / New Zealand) dramas are ok, and they import a lot of dramas (various CSIs, various middle-England crime shows such as Midsomer, Lewis etc). They'll get the big shows too - Game Of Thrones etc. But natural history / science programmes (educational /informative / enlightening programmes) are thin on the ground.

    Much worse - New Zealand 'music' radio stations. Lots of commercial stations (some local, some national), and almost all are a platform for two or more presenters to inflict their gossip & banter on the listener, then play a whole load of adverts for local businesses, and occasionally play a song or two (perhaps to give the presenters enough time to check how much they're being followed / liked on Twitbook.)

    Auntie Beeb
    So there's much to like about The Beeb. But it's such a big beast, and does so many things, that there are bound to be good things and bad things.
    BBC natural history is globally renowned and rightly so. BBC science programmes are usually good. On the radio, In Our Time is a beacon (for me, although others might hate it).

    Sadly the BBC website (in particular the sports pages) are on a downward slide, and none are sliding faster or deeper than the F1 pages. Misleading headlines (basically clickbait), and horrendous jingoism. It's woeful. It's also inexcusable. An organisation with the BBC's resources and charter should be aiming higher. And cost can't be a factor where Benson is concerned? Can it? Would Auntie have to pay him more for an objective, informative article? If he's sitting at the same desk, surely 1000 words of even-handed insight and analysis costs the same as 1000 words of dross?

    I do understand that they (the people that allow/encourage Benson to write his drivel) believe they're 'targeting an audience'. But my frustration is that it's counter-productive. They presumably think he resonates with a lot of people and therefore attracts numbers. I think they're looking at it the wrong way. The current target audience won't suddenly leave in droves to find alternative down-market sites. They could write much more balanced & informed articles, and I'm sure they'd attract more readers than they'd lose.

    It won't happen though. They'll continue to disregard their editorial duties and he'll continue to write his dross.
     
    #10
    DHCanary likes this.

  11. Smithers

    Smithers Well-Known Member
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    8,233
    Likes Received:
    811
    Propaganda?
     
    #11
  12. El_Bando

    El_Bando Can't remember, where was I?
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    14,374
    Likes Received:
    1,830
    The BBC is one of the biggest propaganda machines going. Just take time to read some of their big stories and see how they push your opinion.
     
    #12
  13. EternalMSC

    EternalMSC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    747
    The British media could have easily become the most widely respected and trusted outlet in the World. But I suppose scum sells so why change?

    Bias, propaganda and manipultion has always been rife in newspapers and TV. I tend not to read or watch them. I get my F1 updates from autosport/motorsport/twitter or here. I can get straight to the business cutting out the spin that BBC and Sky put on their articles.

    Example 1. Button pins comeback from 12th to 3rd on increased confidence after in-season testing.

    Example 2. Button on the podium after scything through the pack.

    Example 3. Buttons improvement also a result of relationship change.

    These are examples of titles ranking from decent to trash IMO, I know i'd avoid 2/3 and would click and read title 1. Baldy Benson is capable and can be found responsible of writing articles with that kind of spin about other drivers.
     
    #13
    Smithers likes this.
  14. SgtBhaji

    SgtBhaji Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    14,403
    Likes Received:
    5,570
    Why do you fellas even read that guff? You're just contributing to his analytics report at the end of the month. :p

    I don't like mushrooms... I don't like the flavor or the consistency of 'em. They make me want to barf. So I don't eat 'em. :)
     
    #14
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2016
    allsaintchris. and Smithers like this.
  15. TopClass

    TopClass Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    9,614
    Likes Received:
    3,185
    Benson is an embarrassment to both himself and the BBC.
     
    #15
  16. Sportista

    Sportista Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    395
    Maybe we're having an effect, Benson's latest piece is well within the bounds of acceptability.
     
    #16
  17. BrightLampShade

    BrightLampShade Well-Known Member
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    13,495
    Likes Received:
    2,568
    At least you know what you get with Benson. Some in the BBC team would claim impartiality whilst being anything but. DC used to be the worst for it.
     
    #17
    El_Bando and EternalMSC like this.
  18. EternalMSC

    EternalMSC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    747
    And Brundle.
     
    #18
  19. Smithers

    Smithers Well-Known Member
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    8,233
    Likes Received:
    811
    I must admit, I've found Brundle's views very one sided this year. Shame, because I really like him.
     
    #19
  20. allsaintchris.

    allsaintchris. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    7,655
    Likes Received:
    1,314
    Good job there is no hyping up going on about FP1


    You couldn't make it up...........
     
    #20
    DHCanary likes this.

Share This Page