Tweet
Drivers' uniforms are plastered with dozens of sponsorship decals, but keep an eye on the shirts of NASCAR TV announcers, because some of them are rumored to be trying to shop around the space for logo rights on their shirts to various racing sponsors - in effect offering to wear a sponsor's logo during telecasts in exchange for a fee, of as much as $250,000.
Some sponsors who have been approached by the TV journalists have expressed chagrin; however, some sponsors are apparently willing to pay for the extra TV attention.
A NASCAR spokesman said he was unaware of the issue and declined to say what the NASCAR's response might be. Of course, any such move could be considered an egregious violation of journalistic ethics.
Questions about TV journalism in this sport aren't new. But at Daytona, one top TV announcer raised eyebrows when he publicly castigated the general print-and-web media for what he considered negative reporting about some of this sport's top issues, such as the controversial car of tomorrow, sluggish ticket sales, and flat TV ratings. And earlier this weekend a TV executive sent out a five-point memo to TV announcers warning them of topics to specifically avoid - including ticket sales and TV ratings.
Sponsorship issues, of course, are a given in this sport, where the Pepsi 400 can become the Coca-Cola 400 with the stroke of a pen with enough zeros, and where even the names of the venues is up for bidding, like California Speedway's sellout to become Auto Club Speedway of Southern California. But sometimes things do go over the line - such as the proposed, but eventually canceled by NASCAR, move by Toyota to buy TV sponsorship time for Truck tour races by paying networks for the tag line "presented by Toyota." That would have made for the curious situation of, say, a Ford 200, with naming rights already paid for by that company to the specific track, being in effect renamed by the network, unless Ford or GM or Chrysler were to buy more commercial time themselves.
Some sponsors who have been approached by the TV journalists have expressed chagrin; however, some sponsors are apparently willing to pay for the extra TV attention.
A NASCAR spokesman said he was unaware of the issue and declined to say what the NASCAR's response might be. Of course, any such move could be considered an egregious violation of journalistic ethics.
Questions about TV journalism in this sport aren't new. But at Daytona, one top TV announcer raised eyebrows when he publicly castigated the general print-and-web media for what he considered negative reporting about some of this sport's top issues, such as the controversial car of tomorrow, sluggish ticket sales, and flat TV ratings. And earlier this weekend a TV executive sent out a five-point memo to TV announcers warning them of topics to specifically avoid - including ticket sales and TV ratings.
Sponsorship issues, of course, are a given in this sport, where the Pepsi 400 can become the Coca-Cola 400 with the stroke of a pen with enough zeros, and where even the names of the venues is up for bidding, like California Speedway's sellout to become Auto Club Speedway of Southern California. But sometimes things do go over the line - such as the proposed, but eventually canceled by NASCAR, move by Toyota to buy TV sponsorship time for Truck tour races by paying networks for the tag line "presented by Toyota." That would have made for the curious situation of, say, a Ford 200, with naming rights already paid for by that company to the specific track, being in effect renamed by the network, unless Ford or GM or Chrysler were to buy more commercial time themselves.
Comment