That kind of error would typically result in a journalist being dismissed or suspended or reprimanded in most reputable news organizations, which F1.com is supposed to be. Therefore, it should be ethically sound.
However, if there were an ‘F1 media ethics committee’ (perhaps the FIA?), it would be beneficial for them to investigate whether there are any hidden issues or, alternatively, to acknowledge the reporter’s and editorial team’s sheer ignorance in assigning such a task.
We are not discussing a small insignificant website here. We are referring to the official F1 website, which is owned by the Formula One Group, a subsidiary of Liberty Media, with CEO Stefano Domenicali leading the commercial rights owner. In other words, they are the mouthpiece.
In a post titled “Driver Market: What options do Mercedes have after Hamilton’s dramatic Ferrari move?” published on F1.com and written by Barretto, the first driver a racing team would normally consider is the reserve driver. In this case, at Mercedes, it is Mick Schumacher, the team’s F1 reserve driver.
While it can be debated whether he is suitable or not, Barretto (along with his editors, proofreaders, etc.) has an obligation to include his name on the list. However, they fail to do so and instead appear to be promoting their own agenda, completely disregarding Mick Schumacher.
I can present a compelling argument (which I will do in another Outside Line article) that Toto Wolff might consider Mick as Russell’s partner. But that discussion is for another time.
This article focuses on how the mainstream F1 media manipulates the narrative to suit their own agenda, ignoring Schumacher, which is a neglect of their responsibility as the mouthpiece of our sport. Barretto has his own motives and either lacks knowledge of the current F1 driver landscape or made a mistake that went unnoticed by his entire editorial team, including the site’s editor.
When assigning Barretto, the editor should have addressed questions such as: Who will replace Lewis at Mercedes? Who is their reserve driver?
That is precisely what our editor, Jad Mallak, stated in our NewsDesk Unplugged YouTube video (below) when we discussed this very topic of who would secure the Mercedes seat and when the groundbreaking Hamilton to Ferrari F1 story emerged.
This article on how the British media controls the narrative has been pending for some time. Sky F1, as the dominant narrators in our sport during this era, have been pushing the British agenda to teams, drivers, and everything else for many years. They believe they have complete control over the narrative.
But they can never accomplish that as long as independent Formula 1 news sites like ours, and several others (but not too many mention) expose them for their wrongdoings, this one is the most obvious of all time by their crew!
For the record and importantly, Sky F1 did NOT break the “Hamilton to Mercedes” bombshell, it was actually acquired by them from Italian media who first reported the “Ferrari sign Hamilton” news. Note the distinction, for the British it’s about Hamilton going to Ferrari, for the rest it’s Ferrari opening the door to Lewis.
Therefore his replacement in the most coveted position currently available on the Formula 1 grid from 2025 also known as Mercedes, regardless of their success, needs to be filled, so F1.com with Barretto initiating the discussion to present their own driver plan for George Russell’s seat.
Excluding Mick Schumacher from that report is so obvious that our colleagues at F1-Insider called out Barretto for his bias instead of reporting.
Under the headline on F1-Insider: Hamilton successor: Schumacher not on Mercedes’ list at all? Frederik Hackbarth wrote: “Ironically, the official Formula 1 website even published a list of potential candidates for Hamilton’s successor on Friday, on which the name Schumacher was not mentioned at all. There is no doubt that after challenging years at Haas there can be differing opinions about Mick Schumacher’s talent, but not even acknowledging the official third driver of a team is audacious.
“As much as German Formula 1 fans may find author Lawrence Barretto’s lack of knowledge offensive, it only demonstrates a narrow-minded British perspective on the few remaining German works teams, which is represented by its team headquarters in Brackley and Brixworth, the entrance point of Ineos -Founder and recently Manchester United co-owner Jim Ratcliffe, and not least with the British driver duo Hamilton/Russell, has been increasingly wrapped in the Union Jack in recent years.”
Well done Frederik! For stating what we all see and we agree with you! Thank you for pointing it out and shedding light on why mainstream media, even in Formula 1, promotes and manipulates its own agenda regardless of reason and blatantly malicious.
Barretto and the entire F1.com team: Lower your heads in shame! Or apologize for an unexplainable error that raises significant doubts about the Editorial leadership of Formula 1’s most crucial website. The responsibility for impartiality is to never display any favoritism, ever.
Is Stefano Domenicali not the same?
