Vettel vs Hamilton – tug of war (dangerously subjective) - article feedback

[ENGINE TUNER]

http://www.f1technical.net/news/21290


This is the biased garbage that they put as "news" on this site?

Of course no comments section to call out the lies and bias.

[Steven]

http://www.f1technical.net/news/21290

This is the biased garbage that they put as "news" on this site?

Of course no comments section to call out the lies and bias.

You may want to check the title.
And it's not going to happen again.

[Vasconia]

http://www.f1technical.net/news/21290

This is the biased garbage that they put as "news" on this site?

Of course no comments section to call out the lies and bias.

You may want to check the title.
And it's not going to happen again.

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

[TAG]

http://www.f1technical.net/news/21290

This is the biased garbage that they put as "news" on this site?

Of course no comments section to call out the lies and bias.

You may want to check the title.
And it's not going to happen again.

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

No, that's not offensive if it's labeled an opinion piece and not a news piece. It does provide a lot of opinion calling into question Hamilton's actions, when facts are clearly that he did nothing untoward. So you either report things as facts and leave opinions out of it, or you write an opinion piece. That's how reporting works.

[ENGINE TUNER]

http://www.f1technical.net/news/21290

This is the biased garbage that they put as "news" on this site?

Of course no comments section to call out the lies and bias.

You may want to check the title.
And it's not going to happen again.

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

different opinion based on false or "alternative facts"(actually lies)...

Hamilton for his doubtful behaviour at the end of that safety car period?

False and proven by the data

iffy manoeuvre of the three-time world champion was not his first one behind the safety car, he also usually backs up the field at the end of the warm-up lap before races in a manner which could be deemed dangerous.

False again, every leader has to back up the field in order to not pass the SC on the restart, Stewards cleared him of any "dangerous" or erratic driving.

And more of this complete nonsense and lies continues though the "article" which was posted under the "news" section of this site.

[ENGINE TUNER]

You may want to check the title.
And it's not going to happen again.

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

No, that's not offensive it's labeled an opinion piece and not a news piece. It does provide a lot of opinion calling into question Hamilton's actions, when facts are clearly that he did nothing untoward. So you either report things as facts and leave opinions out of it, or you write an opinion piece. That's how reporting works.

It not labeled an opinion piece and its url clearly has NEWS in it... http://www.f1technical.net/news/21290

[Vasconia]

You may want to check the title.
And it's not going to happen again.

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

No, that's not offensive it's labeled an opinion piece and not a news piece. It does provide a lot of opinion calling into question Hamilton's actions, when facts are clearly that he did nothing untoward. So you either report things as facts and leave opinions out of it, or you write an opinion piece. That's how reporting works.

Well, I agree that it should have been labeled more clearly as a opinion article. I still think that the has overreacted, though.

[ENGINE TUNER]

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

No, that's not offensive it's labeled an opinion piece and not a news piece. It does provide a lot of opinion calling into question Hamilton's actions, when facts are clearly that he did nothing untoward. So you either report things as facts and leave opinions out of it, or you write an opinion piece. That's how reporting works.

Well, I agree that it should have been labeled more clearly as a opinion article. I still think that the has overreacted, though.

When someone clicks into the news section it is the uppermost top article, it is CLEARLY labeled as NEWS.

Also it is not "subjective", it contains outright lies and untruths

[Tubas]

The "dangerously subjective" article writes...

"the Briton also feels the pressure. He came to the point that he urged his team with a desperate cry to force Bottas to act as a dummy and slow the late charging Vettel down to give him the chance to overtake his championship rival. As that would have been a complete and open disgrace for Mercedes, the team refused to do that."

Hamilton said, and I quote the transcript: "Guys if Valtteri’s not fighting anyone ahead need to have him slow down, give a bad wake."

So.. from that transmission the opinion piece has Hamilton with a "desperate cry to force Bottas to act as a dummy"

That is one big leap to go from the fact of the transmission with the all important "if," to it being a desperate cry.

The article is not opinion based on fact. It is just opinion.

Can we get back to the cooking?

[sAx]

You may want to check the title.
And it's not going to happen again.

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

No, that's not offensive it's labeled an opinion piece and not a news piece. It does provide a lot of opinion calling into question Hamilton's actions, when facts are clearly that he did nothing untoward. So you either report things as facts and leave opinions out of it, or you write an opinion piece. That's how reporting works.

+1 Strangely felt exactly the same when I read it! 'Good articles' are those like that which revealed the F-Duct fluidic switch before it became common knowledge and the Octopus Exhaust! The mods/invigilators obviously think PlanetF1 fan rage is more interesting than the technical rage that this site should be all about!

[ClarkBT11]

I think its a good article, subjetive but I see nothing offensive. Unless someone thinks its offensive to have a different opinion.

No, that's not offensive it's labeled an opinion piece and not a news piece. It does provide a lot of opinion calling into question Hamilton's actions, when facts are clearly that he did nothing untoward. So you either report things as facts and leave opinions out of it, or you write an opinion piece. That's how reporting works.

Well, I agree that it should have been labeled more clearly as a opinion article. I still think that the has overreacted, though.

The Hamilton dangerous speed part could be questionable, if it was deemed dangerous he would of received a penalty.

[Steven]

A few more things:

- Previous opinionated articles were posted under "news" as well. It's a technical limitation.
- The title has been changed with prefixed "Opinion:"

[marvin78]

People are clearly overreacting and exaggerating in this case. And Not only a few. A lot of them do it.

[George-Jung]

Great, another topic.
Your point has been made, could we please move along now.

[SR71]

What I do like about this article is it's non-biased look at the events and then filtered through what could be a causal observers lens.

I think any causal fan will wonder why lewis was behaving the way he was, and rightly so.