|
Interesting series of events.
Race car driver known not to have graduated from the "Same Same Media Training Centre for Race Car Drivers" is asked a leading question and expectantly makes flippant, off the cuff comment and is slammed by outraged media and series organiser for such. Issues public apology and Series organiser pockets $25,000. All is good, justice has been done and seen to be done.
Targets of said comment make no statement indicating offended status, instead saying publicly it is a non event to a large extent and they have valued his advice and support on car setup and track knowledge. Series organiser says people should look to and comment on said ladies "on track" performances. Falls under "move on, nothing to see here category.
Commentators from outside the sport push the "female" aspect and focus on women competing on equal grounds with men. Equality, ground breaking moments and more media attention asking "how does it feel to be competing against men" questions which are lapped up by said females. So Series organiser promotes this gender differentiation for promotional purposes to its greatest effect. Sponsor of said females in for the exposure. Still no real focus on their "on track performance".
All interviews are conducted in race suits and in front of car emblazoned in sponsor name. Many comments by said gender differentiated drivers about wanting respect and recognition for their "achievements on track" and just wanting equal or non favourable opportunities to compete which is achieved via courtesy of the very same gender differentiation. Catch 22, twice around the flagpole, cause/effect type stuff.
Exec summary... much media air time on issues not related to on track performance centred around participants who have fostered the "women in a man's sport" headline. Delivering air time to car sponsor.
To date I still haven't been able to establish who it is that has actually been offended other than the media and Series Organiser.
Whole thing seems staged managed. Feel for Reynolds. Not the brightest light in the harbour and a natural target for such a media strategy. Same team, known for off-cuff comments and feels comfortable making flippant comments about team mates etc. If they were seriously looking for a serious answer they could and should have asked a more serious driver but hey, he only said what 90% of the field and spectators were most likely privately thinking and saying but had the nouse to shut up. Harvey Norman should pay his fine for giving them the additional advertising time.
|