Formula 1: Sky Sports not even trying to hide obvious bias?

The subject of Sky Sports' bias has been brought up in Formula 1 circles on a number of occasions in recent years, specifically since Max Verstappen emerged as a true world championship challenger to Lewis Hamilton back in 2021. At that point, Hamilton had won six of the seven most recent titles.

That subject has been brought to the forefront on a number of occasions during the 2024 season as well, namely because of the fact that the Red Bull driver has actually had a legitimate challenger himself over the last few months in McLaren's Lando Norris.

Red Bull chief technical officer and legendary designer Adrian Newey, who is set to join Aston Martin next year, stated straight-up that the British media lean heavily toward British drivers, and that bias has, in turn, led to Verstappen being unjustly villainized.

He also acknowledged that the 26-year-old Dutchman is not the first. The same was true for other world champions, including Michael Schumacher, Sebastian Vettel, and Nico Rosberg.

While there are some who understandably refuse to acknowledge such bias simply because they too are fans of the drivers whom Sky Sports believe can do no wrong, what makes Sky Sports' continued slanted coverage so interesting is how obvious and unrepentant it has become.

Never has it been more obvious than it was in Singapore, where Norris led every lap from pole position and crossed the line well ahead of Verstappen in second place to trim the three-time world champion's points lead from 59 points down to 52.

When Red Bull emerged as the team to beat in 2022, all we ever heard were things like "Are Mercedes back?" and "Formula 1 is just better when Mercedes are the front". When Red Bull and Ferrari were going back and forth week in and week out in the early stages of the year, all we ever heard was Sky Sports yearning for Mercedes to make it a three-way fight.

We never heard how great it was that someone had taken the fight to (and overtaken) their precious Mercedes after they won eight consecutive constructor world championships.

Now Red Bull have won two in a row, McLaren currently have a more dominant car than Red Bull had during that stretch (see Norris' 25-second lead before halfway in Singapore...), they have outscored Red Bull in eight consecutive races (and 11 of the last 12) to take a lead in the standings, and suddenly the most boring race of the year is "great for Formula 1".

All of a sudden, it's apparently "great for Formula 1" that someone has taken the fight to the team currently in second place, even though the top team is the team with the clear dominant car each weekend and has outscored every other team by at least 125 points over the 12 most recent race weekends.

Just like that, lopsided races featuring a car head and shoulders above the rest are great for Formula 1 again, like they supposedly were when it was Mercedes doing the dominating with Hamilton.

But when it was Verstappen, fans were reportedly "leaving in droves" (even though TV ratings and attendance figures exposed those claims as nothing more than propaganda a long time ago).

Then they try to deny their bias, most recently when Newey made his claims about Verstappen not being British.

You could make the argument that Verstappen singlehandedly "broke" Sky Sports in 2021, to the point where the continued nonsense spewed by one particular pundit, who is now known for swearing in front of a worldwide audience, including children, during the broadcast, resulted in a Verstappen boycott late in the 2022 season.

And they aren't even hiding it anymore.

The same reporter criticized Oscar Piastri, to his face, for taking the lead from Norris and winning in Monza. They simply cannot stand the fact that anybody would dare pose a threat to their beloved British drivers, and that prejudice is leaking out more and more than they know, because not everybody is completely oblivious to their agenda.

It's entirely possible that they don't even realize they're doing it, which kind of makes it that much more laughable that they truly believe their coverage is objective and deny such bias.

Think back to the Miami Grand Prix in 2023, when Sergio Perez took pole and Verstappen only started ninth. Perez was the betting favorite to win the race and thus to take the lead in the world championship from Formula 1's so-called "villain".

When Verstappen took the lead due to starting the race on a bolder alternate tire strategy, he built up a massive gap over Perez, despite the fact that his tires were much, much older than Perez's.

He ended up falling behind Perez upon making a late pit stop, but he had no issue retaking the lead on newer tires and winning the race. But he ultimately was able to win because of the high-level tire conservation he executed in the race's middle stages.

How many times have we heard Sky Sports refer to certain drivers as "tire whisperers"? How many times has Hamilton been praised for managing his tires throughout his 105-win career?

But when Verstappen pulled off a masterclass to retain the world championship lead on a day when his teammate was favored to take a third win from four races, lead announcer David Croft stated that “maybe we need just a little bit more pushing and a little less tire saving" in Formula 1.

In Croft's defense, there have been plenty of other instances in which it has been obvious that he has gone out of his way to remain impartial. But is that really "following the story"? Is that really being impartial?

Bias isn't about "rooting for certain drivers". It's about the blatantly obvious double standards.

Verstappen, who pointed to the No. 1 on his race car after that race as a casual reminder to the doubters (which was unsurprisingly criticized), went on to add 16 more victories in 2023, giving him a record 19 in a single season. Perez hasn't won since.

I get that there are plenty of other media outlets that are opinionated to the point of being biased. You could say the same thing about this article itself. But the Dutch media, for instance, aren't responsible for the international Formula 1 broadcasts. Sky Sports possesses those rights, and they choose to take sides and push their narratives.

Consistently.

And you know exactly whose side they're going to take, every single time. It seems that every Grand Prix is another reminder of that.

We have seen several incidents with Verstappen involving British drivers over the years, specifically Hamilton in 2021 and even Norris earlier this year. Even when some of those incidents have included what would be considered direct role reversals, the tone always conveniently changes, and it's always Verstappen's fault.

"Just following the story". If only that were true.