Auto Racing, in general, is having a bit of an identity crisis. It is not so much that the fans, or even the general public, do not recognize it. It is more a general feeling that there is no real connection to racing anymore.

Practically everybody can look at the #14 Office Depot Chevy driven by Tony Stewart in NASCAR and recognize it as a “NASCAR” race car. However, present the general public with the #10 Target / Ganassi Racing Honda of Dario Franchitti and the #4 Vodafone McLaren of Lewis Hamilton you will find that few outside of the paddock recognize the difference from IndyCar to Formula 1. Both of those cars, to the “non-racing” public, are likely identified as one or the other.

The “prototypes” of Grand-Am and American Le Mans are beautiful bits of shell and engineering but to the casual observer they are simply “race cars”.

Generally, if you throw a number and a logo on any given car it becomes recognizable as a “race car”.

The “identity” crisis is not necessarily that the general public can not see or appreciate the differences between the series of racing but that they do not “identify” with the concept of racing.

Even NASCAR, which enjoys a higher fan base and TV audience than the rest combined, suffers from this “concept” identity. However, the organizers and owners are fighting back. On one hand, they have listened to their fan base about the “race experience”. The TV broadcasts are tighter and closer to the surface. They have also done a fair job of carrying the familiarity of the “backyard” and “weekend warrior” concept of the early days of NASCAR despite the many changes that have brought it far from that concept.

IndyCar is getting hit hard. Reports show that TV viewing is not just down but that it is on life support waiting for someone to activate the “living will” and pull the plug. The issues surrounding the series have less to do with the quality of racing but seem to be centered around the concept that the series is currently based on. The very name “IndyCar”, and previously “Indy Racing League”, identify the series with one race out of the entire season. On top of that, the “Indy 500” falls in the middle of the season. The general public doesn’t grasp the concept that there is “Indy” racing outside of Indianapolis or that those races are of any real concern. The “Indy 500” matters. The “IndyCar” series doesn’t.

NASCAR opens with their big race. The “Daytona 500” is NASCAR. However, the series is not identified as the “Daytona Racing League” or “DayCar”. However, following that logic will not work for the “Indy” series. NASCAR more or less owns that concept. Grand-Am is wrapped up with it and the “ROLEX 24” but that is more of a Daytona Speedway thing.

Perhaps “IndyCar”, if their series is going to follow the namesake of Indianapolis, should make the “Indy 500” the final championship race of the season. The public could wrap their heads around that. It is the NFL “Superbowl” model that everybody knows and understands.

Sports Car racing, as in Grand-Am and American Le Mans, seem to be identified by the type of cars in the field as much as a general characterization of the drivers. There is a bit of a “foreign” feel to it for the average American. There is a conceptual notion of the European cars with back roads rallies and co-pilot drivers that is both alien and familiar. It is almost seen the same way as bicycle racing in the sense as it isn’t taken seriously by the general motoring public. Throw that together with the mindset generally associated with Porsche, BMW, Ferrari and others. It is “elitist”, to a degree. It is for the “driving” enthusiast.

Formula 1 is saved, to a degree, by the same “European” aspects. Where Sports Car racing suffers from the “foreign” and exotic flavor, F1 holds on because it is so exotic. The speed of the thing. The movement. It is eye-catching to the point that many TV channel flippers will hold for a bit and watch it. F1, in the USA however, has no real constant hold as all the races happen “over there”… Way over there. China, Bahrain, Malaysia, Singapore, etc… This makes it hard to sell to an audience that is used to hearing Darrell Waltrip yell “Boogity, Boogity, Boogity” week after week from venues that can be found on a map in the glove box. There is a gamble on the US market, however, as construction is on schedule in Texas for F1 to race in the States later this year. We’ll see…

Auto Racing, in general, has taken big hits from several fronts that have nothing to do with “the racing” or any faults within any given series. Television, for example, has evolved from very few to very, very many choices. Ratings are hard to come by even for big networks with big, popular programs. Racing needs television to survive. The money from that advertising funnels to the series and feeds the sport. However, fans hate the breaks. NASCAR has addressed this with many stops viewed as a split-screen. The race is still on while that gecko thing is yapping on about car insurance…  It’s a good model but easily over-played. The thirst for advertising dollars can easily consume the product. In this context, “product” has two conflicting meanings. For the drivers, teams and owners the “product” is the racing and the advertising is necessary to fuel it. For the TV execs the “product” is whatever else can be crammed into it. The “racing” is merely there to tow the commercials.

Race fans expect sponsor logos on the cars. It’s a given. What they do not expect is every aspect of the race experience to carry a “sponsorship”. The balance between exploiting the race and paying for the costs of presenting the race must be maintained as viewers know the score and are easily put off by “too much”.

TV ratings and the battle of competing with so many options of what to view is only part of it. The lagging economic factors over the past years have taken a large hit also. NASCAR has long been driven by attendance. The TV audience largely watches so when they go in person they have a familiarity with it. With gas prices approaching $4/gallon the incentive to drive 2, 3 or more hours to the race is hit hard. Without that “live” experience, many fans can lose interest quickly. It is a fact of human existence.

Throw in a growing and younger population that have grown with many more influences surrounding them. It is hard enough for them to latch onto any given activity when their entire life experience has been a barrage of “now! Now! NOW!”

Take in addition, one of the major influences of the younger population… The environment. It is possible that this is the nail which is making its way toward the coffin. Many see “racing” as wasteful and excessive and destructive. They see cars making left turns hour after hour burning up fossil fuels. They see thousands of fans with disdain for throwing tons of “greenhouse” gas in the air while driving to watch someone else burn up their air. They don’t just “not watch” it. They see it as “redneck” and “backwards” and even as part of the perceived threat to human survival. They buy hybrids and go to “Occupy” meetings.

Fans grow from other fans. Parents introduce children to their own interests. The problem is that parents, like racing, are facing so many challenges and varieties of influence that the chain can not be maintained. The fan base is being fractured.

How can you grow a fan base when there is no real attachment to the idea in the first place? NASCAR is trying. They cross-promote the races with information concerning the changes they have made to address environmental concerns. Bio-Fuels, mileage economy, recycling have been embraced by NASCAR and showcased. It not for the benefit of the average Jeff Gordon fan but for the naysayers. In the process, they hope to attract the attention to the excitement of the sport through tapping into the “green” aspects they have embraced.

It can work. Hybrids as pace cars. Toyotas winning races while also selling the Prius doesn’t hurt. Other series have embraced Bio-Fuels and diesel. Showcasing “clean speed” and materials recycling may be able to break through the disdain of the casual environmentalist.

Another consideration to break through to the disinterested is to appeal to their emotion on an intellectual level. “Green” racing is good. Take it a step further. Illustrate how racing translates to them directly. Their car… Their daily driver… The work and “soccer mom” machine… It is a by-product of racing technology. Nobody really considers it but the engine, chassis design, brakes, economy, aerodynamics, tires and any number of details in the design and safety of the car in the driveway can be traced back to a race car. Show the benefit of racing and by doing so generate some respect for it. There is more to modern racing than “man and machine pitted against one another in the stadium of speed”. There is real and measurable benefit that can be showcased.

The “identity” crisis of each series is a crosshatched problem. The “television” people and the “racing” people have to get on the same page for promotion and broadcast viability. The TV people have to see and understand the idea of racing and look beyond the simple number of potential viewers. Embrace the sport for what it is and express the excitement in the promotion. Racing is a reality show, a soap opera, an action drama, a tragedy and a comedy all spun together. Don’t just let viewers know the race is on. Tell the viewers how friggin’ flipped out you are for being able to show it.

In other words… Promote racing like you do football.