Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Will Rhymes 'Fine' After Being Hit By Pitch And Fainting

An unexpected story shows the value of unscripted narrative

DAYTONA BEACH FL - FEBRUARY 20:  Crew members for Trevor Bayne driver of the #21 Motorcraft/Quick Lane Ford celebrate in pit row as Bayne performs a burnout after winning the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series Daytona 500 at Daytona International Speedway on February 20 2011 in Daytona Beach Florida.  (Photo by Jason Smith/Getty Images for NASCAR)

Let me ask you a question. If you go to a movie theater and see a trailer for an upcoming film that essentially gives away every plot twist, every action set piece, and every bit of interesting dialogue... how likely would it be that you'd want to see the whole movie at full price?

I pondered that question as I watched FOX's Daytona 500 coverage yesterday. It seemed to me that FOX was working so hard at telling you what the story was going to be that there almost seemed to be no point in finding out how it ended for yourself.

Perhaps that's why Trevor Bayne's stunning upset victory was so incredible - not only was it off script, it hadn't even been considered as the story's climax by those trying to tell it.

Star-divide

On the one hand, I love that Bayne's win so thoroughly flummoxed everyone at FOX; on the other, however, I was - and remain - upset about the network's apparent belief that the only stories that are interesting are the ones that they shove down their viewers' throats.

Sadly, their brand of coverage is the rule these days, not the exception... and maybe that explains why folks are staying away from racing in droves.

Some of my grandest memories growing up were of the Indianapolis 500 pre-race shows. It seemed like the broadcasters back in the years of my youth believed that the time before the race was a perfect occasion to tell the stories of the 33 starters in the race. Instead of what we get today - talking heads, pundits, and endless analysts spouting off their opinions about how a story is going to play out, or literally hours of vapid, base schmoozing and hard sell (like yesterday's FOX telecast) - the hours before the 500-Mile Race were filled with documentary-style vignettes about the men about to take part in the Greatest Spectacle in Racing.

You still see this approach to big-event broadcasting at the Kentucky Derby, because NBC realizes that most Americans only watch three horse races a year (at most, and only if a horse is qualified for a run at the Triple Crown). Knowing that they have to get most of America re-acquainted with the sport before the event runs, each year NBC dedicates a good chunk of time to Ken Burns-style examinations of the competitors and the people who work with them. They establish the backstory so that the viewers can enjoy the story to be played out before them.

This stands in stark contrast to today's broadcasting, where it seems like the priority is to remove all nuance and flavor from the event. Modern race broadcasts are like Choose Your Own Adventure books that only have one plot option. The pundits tell you what you will see and what storylines you should pay attention to, and the directors rarely focus on anything that deviates from that script. In the case of the Daytona 500, it was EARNHARDT, EARNHARDT, EARNHARDT. At Indianapolis in recent years, it's been DANICA, DANICA, DANICA.

This rubs me the wrong way for many reasons. I am an avid reader. I love picking up a new book and immersing myself in a story - the sheer joy of discovery and the lure of the unexpected are my deepest pleasures. It's why I love libraries more than bookstores. With the exception of a few treasured titles, I rarely enjoy going back to a book again and again and again, because eventually my familiarity with the plot, characters, and story arc becomes too repetitive and dull to engage my interest. It's also one of the reasons why I generally despise movie remakes and the trend toward recycling ideas in modern entertainment.

Reading the Cliff's Notes of a book might be fine for a high-schooler desperate to make up for the fact that she procrastinated a reading assignment for six weeks, but in terms of enjoying the luxuriant detail of and fascinating journey through a plot, it sucks rocks. It removes the reader's ability to draw his own conclusions from the material because they're already spelled out by the summarizer.

That's the message I want to give to racing broadcasters: let your viewers enjoy the story. If you must provide backstory, do so unobtrusively, with an eye toward informing instead of persuading. The more you push to make people enjoy something, the stronger the desire will be to resist that enjoyment. The greatest attraction of racing is the anticipation of the unexpected - if you spend all your time telling people what to expect, what is there left to anticipate?

Racing is so rich, so layered with story and nuance, that each new event is a fresh chance for viewers to discover the sport anew. There is nothing to discover in the attention-deficit, flashy, substance-free world of Digger, Boogity Boogity Boogity, and GoDaddy Girls... except the sudden and overriding desire to find something else to watch.

Comment 5 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Overanalysis by talking heads is the main reason I no longer find televised NFL games tolerable. This FOX crew took overanalysis to a new level yesterday. For me, it ended up being the proverbial “watching a train wreck” … just to hear the next ridiculous thing that DW said, or more “deep insight” from another one on the team, and all the while wondering how in the world NASCAR thinks that stuff is going to increase its fan base.

by inf1958 on Feb 21, 2011 4:10 PM EST reply actions  

If only

they gave us actually useful information on how the race might work out. It is, like most sports announcing, a large number of old phrases, and with Darrell Waltrip, hopelessly trying to create memes.

Never do they tell us about pit stop options, and why you would choose that option in that situation, and what has to happen for it to succeed. Same with car setups. Actually Kyle Petty is decent at explaining car setup variables.

Only once did the FOX three explain why the racing is like this now. Any other time they stirred up excitement we were left to assume that the new pavement at Daytona was only to result in restrictor plate races (after 2001) on the old Talladega surface, as opposed to the slightly more handling-influenced old Daytona surface style racing.

I was going mad when instead of a file of cars heading to pit road, or staying out, they showed Kevin Harvick’s car being pushed in the garage area for a moment. We almost missed to see if the driver we like on track was staying out, or pitting.

A side effect: Whenever the broadcast crew fails to go into detail on pit strategy, and pit strategy influences the outcome of the race, fans don’t understand it, and in turn want to remove as many aspects of pit strategy from racing. Even though it is one of the most interesting things.

To me, CART was dead in 2002 when they did the fuel window thing. Racing had become predictable.

by schraderfan on Feb 21, 2011 5:00 PM EST reply actions  

Unfortunately, Tony, that is the way the news reporting profession chooses to operate.
“…however, I was – and remain – upset about the network’s apparent belief that the only stories that are interesting are the ones that they shove down their viewers’ throats.”

That behavior extends outside of Fox’s NASCAR reporting… and indeed, even beyond sports reporting in general. And like I said, the news reporting profession don’t seem to see anything wrong with it. Within sports, in the NFL we were subject to the entire Brett Favre thing for two whole years while plenty of other news was happening. Pick your story out of other sports. Outside of it, we were subject to whatever the news media decided would be the Meme Of The Month (animal die offs, for example, occur routinely, but leave it to the news media to suddenly decide it was a story). That is the reporting profession’s modus operandi, and examples like the Kentucky Derby are unfortunately the exception to it.

I really wish that reporting organizations would buckle down and examine a narrative’s real details, instead of forcing them into whichever ready-made container happens to be handy. As an NFL fan, it bugs the hell out of me to see such lazy memes be used instead of real analysis (I can’t stop counting the number of them that exist for the Indianapolis Colts, for example). In medical science reporting, good God… But, what can you do?

------

"How can a pickup truck contain enough mass to unfold into a towering machine? I say if Ringling Brothers can get 15 clowns into a Volkswagen, anything is possible."

Roger Ebert, Transformers review.

by E.M.H. on Feb 21, 2011 7:42 PM EST reply actions  

This is why I love the F1 broadcasts so much

Listening David Hobbs and Bob Varsha call an F1 race is a pleasure. The whole Mystery Science Theatre 3000 feel of the broadcasts (with them in a studio half a world away from the race) just adds to it. No overhyping predetermined story lines, no trying to make themselves the story, just describing what’s happening in a very entertaining and informative way. So much different from any other sports broadcasts.

I’m bummed that the Bharian race was cancelled. Now I have to wait 2 more weeks until the first broadcast.

by Mathieu McGowan on Feb 21, 2011 8:02 PM EST reply actions  

This is why Indianapolis is so good

If you go back through the “Legacy Series” DVDs, which recap every “500” from 1960 to 1999, there is massive unpredictability nearly every May. Even last year when Dario was poised to run away with it, the fuel situation brought the result everyone expected into question. The network can come up with story lines to start the race, but the ending almost always defies prediction.

Daytona really benefitted this year from having so many big-name drivers be dropped from contention in the early wreck, which helped change the story in Trevor Bayne’s favor.

by HB_Donnelly on Feb 21, 2011 9:50 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Pop Off Valve is your one-stop shop for IZOD IndyCar Series news and commentary on the SBNation network.

Join our community and let your voice be heard!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Jasonpierrepaul_small
IZOD IndyCar Series Gives Fans Access to Drivers Past and Present
Pop-off2_small
Purchase US-RACING photo calendar for Japan tsunami relief

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Support INDYCAR Sponsors!

SUPPORT INDYCAR SPONSORS

Visit the INDYCAR Sponsors site to see which companies are supporting your favorite form of motorsports. Throw some business their way if you can!

The SBN Indy 500 Primer

Need to get up to speed on the Indianapolis 500-Mile Race and the famed "Brickyard" - the Indianapolis Motor Speedway? Check out our three-part SBNation Indy 500 Primer:

The More You Know

About Pop Off Valve

Pop Off Valve [POP awf vālv] - noun 1. A spring-loaded relief mechanism on a turbocharged engine that releases excess pressure within the engine manifold; 2. An IndyCar blog intended to release excess opinion within the fan community.

Acronym: P.O.V.
(see also: Point of View)

"Running my mouth, that's my pop-off valve. It gives me a little bit of relief so I could get back to what I was doing." - Dale Earnhardt, Jr.

Copyright

©2011 Thunderbird Creative Media, LLC.
All rights reserved.

Theunions_medium


Editor-in-Chief

Pop-off2_small Tony Johns

Associate Editors

Wasted_years_av_hd2_small fleshwound_NPG

Correspondents

Dalenixon-thumb_small DaleNixon

Dsc_0344alter_small Scott Whitmore

Sunset_small Brian Neudorff