Last Updated on April 14 2026, 10:56 am
Formula 1 scandal with consequences – The controversy surrounding Max Verstappen has escalated beyond a brief incident in the paddock, with new details emerging that suggest his actions at the Japanese Grand Prix have sparked formal discussions at the highest levels of the sport.
What initially seemed to be a heated argument between a driver and a journalist, resulting in the dismissal of the Guardian writer by Max Verstappen, has evolved into a broader issue concerning the FIA and the media structure of Formula 1.
Would you like to see more TJ13 Formula 1 coverage? Add us to your favourites list on Google to receive trusted F1 news.
Revealed: Verstappen’s dismissal triggers crisis meeting
During the Suzuka weekend, Verstappen made headlines after asking a journalist to leave a media setting, an unusual move for a Formula 1 driver. At the time, the incident was seen as a moment of frustration. However, reports now suggest that the situation had more serious repercussions behind the scenes.
According to multiple sources, the matter was escalated to the F1 Media Advisory Council, a body comprising senior journalists who represent media interests within the sport. Concerned by the precedent that such behaviour might set, the group formally raised the issue with the FIA, voicing their concerns about how media access and conduct were being handled within the paddock.
While it is unclear whether the FIA took direct disciplinary action, the fact that the governing body was involved highlights the sensitivity of the situation. Media access is a cornerstone of Formula 1’s global appeal, and any perceived restriction or conflict between drivers and journalists is taken very seriously.
MORE NEWS – Simpler, Louder, Sooner? Cadillac CEO hints at 2029 reset for F1’s 2026 ‘Frankencars’
Red Bull responded behind closed doors with a crisis meeting
Within Red Bull Racing, the reaction was swift but measured. Team principal Laurent Mekies reportedly addressed the situation directly with Verstappen during the race weekend.
It is understood that Mekies acknowledged that Verstappen may have felt personally provoked, but made it clear that such behaviour is not acceptable from the team’s perspective. Like all Formula 1 teams, Red Bull relies heavily on maintaining professional relationships with the media, sponsors, and governing bodies.
There was also a meeting between the journalist involved — reportedly from The Guardian — and Red Bull’s communications team. While the details of this discussion remain confidential, its occurrence suggests an attempt to manage the fallout and prevent further escalation.
Verstappen stands firm
Despite internal discussions and external scrutiny, Verstappen appears unwilling to back down. Reports suggest that the Dutch driver has no interest in holding a reconciliation meeting with the journalist in question, indicating that the conflict remains unresolved.
The root of the conflict dates back to the 2021 season finale in Abu Dhabi, where Verstappen felt he was deliberately provoked by a question referencing an earlier incident. The question revisited the Spanish Grand Prix, where Verstappen received a penalty following a collision with George Russell, an incident that ultimately impacted his championship tally.
Being asked about the incident again months later clearly struck a nerve. For Verstappen, the line between legitimate questioning and perceived provocation appears to have been crossed, leading to his reaction in Suzuka.
Formula 1 engines: FIA two-stage fix with no hardware intervention
Wider implications for Formula 1
This episode raises broader questions about the relationship between drivers and the media in modern Formula 1. With increasing scrutiny, growing global audiences and heightened tensions in this competitive era, the pressure on interactions between drivers and journalists is greater than ever.
The involvement of the FIA and the Media Advisory Council suggests that this is not being treated as an isolated incident. Instead, it could prompt renewed discussions about media protocols, driver responsibilities and conflict management within the sport.
NEXT ARTICLE – Fans ditching F1 as viewer numbers collapse
As predicted by the independent F1 press before the season opener, the all-new 2026 era is rapidly descending into farce. A huge plunge in viewer numbers following the Japanese Grand Prix makes plain the fans are voting with their feet.
The fundamental architecture of the 50/50 power units was flawed from its inception. As Stefano Domenicali, F1 supremo, admitted in 2025, the resulting regulations were a “political” decision based on attracting more manufacturers into the sport.
Whilst the FIA working party on the next generation of F1 engines was formed in 2017, it was in 2020 that the first mention of the all-new 50/50 power unit was made. As the name suggests, the power contribution from the internal combustion engine would be 50%, as it would be from the battery.
F1 manufacturers mis-read the future of road cars
A bold new step into greater efficiency and the electrified future was the intention, yet increasing the current electrical output by three times was always going to be ambitious. For many auto manufacturers who did not believe in the coming of the EV revolution, hybrids would be the bulk of the future road cars they produced.
And whilst hybrids have become a transitional technology in the auto industry, they have significant disadvantages compared to either the internal combustion engine or full electric cars. They contain the bulk of both an internal combustion engine along with the weight of a battery and, given the average person is…CONTINUE TO READ THIS STORY
A senior writer at TJ13, C.J. Alderson serves as Senior Editor and newsroom coordinator, with a background in online sports reporting and motorsport magazine editing. Alderson’s professional training in media studies and experience managing content teams ensures TJ13 maintains consistency of voice and credibility. During race weekends, Alderson acts as desk lead, directing contributors and smoothing breaking stories for publication.
I read that MV says that journalist laughed in his face. If that is so – and I don’t think MV lies; he’s very much a “what you see is what you get” kind of guy – steps should have been taken to remove that journalist from the circuit. It’s unacceptable, unprofessional behaviour. I believe – as seems to be the case all too often these days – that both Red Bull and the FIA have their priorities all arse about face!
And the journalist himself says that isn’t so. His version is that he smiled nervously at Verstappen’s reaction to the question. So it’s he said this, he said that and we’re back to the beginning of people taking sides depending on who’s version you prefer to believe. The fact that many other journalists reported the later event in Japan with such shock rather suggests that Max isn’t exactly faultless here.
fair to say that the journalist was trying to get a reaction, and probably got too much of one!