CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: RACIN’S FULL OF THEM

I wonder if there is any other sport that has as many
conflicts of interest as racing? From sanctioning bodies to the media, racing,
especially NASCAR racing, is full of them.

For a truckload of cash, you can be the official this or
the official that of NASCAR. I think Ford is the official truck of NASCAR. You
gotta wonder if they’re a little more lenient with Fords than with the other
makes when it comes to inspection time…or new body style time.

Remember a couple of years ago when the Budweiser car was
given a provisional in apparent disregard of the rules? Budweiser is the
official beer of NASCAR.

Is it really proper for a sanctioning body to own race
tracks? Yeah, I know that NASCAR doesn’t technically own any race tracks, but
the family that owns NASCAR owns most of the International Speedway Corporation
stock. And when NASCAR is in the business of deciding which tracks get a race,
whose tracks do you think get the most favorable consideration? ISC is involved
in building a few new tracks around the country, and you don’t have to be a
rocket scientist to figure out that those new tracks will get first dibs on any
new Winston Cup races that NASCAR decides to add to the schedule.

Should fathers be in the broadcast booth when their sons
are on the track? I like Ned Jarrett and I think that he’s the ultimate color
commentator, but it seems that he’s overcome his initial hesitance of talking
about his son during races. I watched Winston Cup races for two or three years
with Jarrett in the booth and never knew it was his son driving. But now he’s
cheering him on from the broadcast booth. The Jarretts aren’t the only family
involved. You’ve got the Pettys, the Waltrips, and even the Parsons. Doesn’t the
race fan even rate some sort of acknowledgement about the relations?

It’s just not the TV "talent" that has
conflicts. I’ve covered just about every NASCAR race at Talladega since 1995 as
a reporter for Racing Information Systems. You should see the stuff that
reporters get during a race weekend. When Craftsman announced their involvement
in the NASCAR SuperTruck Series, all the reporters there got a nice tool set
worth a few bucks.

RJ Reynolds gave the reporters a nice sweater last October
with "No Bull 5" prominently displayed on it. The October before that,
they gave the reporters a nice set of glasses with "No Bull 5" sand
blasted on the glass. Even as I write this, I’m wearing a red cap with
"It’s time" in white on the front, the "Dodge/Different"
logo on the left, and "Daytona 2001" on the back. At Talladega, Dodge
not only gave the reporters hats, but a stop watch and a clip board.

Is it really proper for the people who report on events at
a race track to take gifts from the teams/sponsors they’re supposed to be
reporting on? Yeah, I’m as guilty as anyone in the press box who’s eaten lunch
provided by LCI Long Distance or had breakfast prepared by Debbie Benson and
sponsored by Betty Crocker.

With the recent news that TNN has purchased part of the
American Speed Association, we have another great example of a conflict of
interest. The ASA series is going to a spec series this year, and the drivers
are likely to be very outspoken about it. Will TNN’s reporters report any
controversial or negative news about the ASA? Only time will tell. Do we really
want cable companies owning sanctioning bodies?

Another conflict is when those cable companies sponsor
races or teams. TBS is an excellent example. Are they going to go to that in car
camera on the Cartoon Network car a little more than the others? I know ESPN a
few years ago sponsored an unknown driver in a Busch race (if memory serves).
The driver got a whole lot more attention than he would normally have if ESPN
hadn’t been involved with the car.

Speaking of in-car cameras, you do know that sponsors pay
for those, don’t you? There’s no editorial consideration given in the placement
of those cameras. A sponsor waves a wad of money at the network, they install
the cameras, and we’re treated to an in-car camera shot of a back marker going
to the pits on lap 5 with a blown engine… just so the producers can fulfill a
sponsorship contract.

I don’t think the general public is really aware of much
of these conflicts or potential conflicts, or they’d be screaming out about
them. Would you trust Dan Rather to report fairly on a company he had an
ownership in? Do you think CNN headline news will be fair to Microsoft now that
AOL controls the network?

Doesn’t the racing fan deserve full disclosure of all
conflicts of interest?