Sports broadcasting has come a long way. Back in 1983, NASCAR introduced in-car cameras during the Daytona 500, giving fans a peek inside the cockpit for the first time. These tools, now in HD with multiple angles like roof and bumper views, aimed to pull viewers closer to the action. Yet, as networks like FOX and TNT push for more immersive experiences, a few drivers like Brad Keselowski wonder if too many cameras make the sports-watching experience confusing.

NASCAR’s TV evolution keeps upgrading itself. From the introduction of 2018’s X (formerly known as Twitter) live streams showing raw in-car feeds to 2025’s Max Driver Cam in 2025. These upgrades let fans hear team radios and see speeds hit 200 mph up close. But recently, questions were raised about the different camera angles to enhance the viewing experience, and Keselowski’s concern stands out, as it echoes a frustration many feel.

Brad Keselowski calls out tight camera work in sports

Brad Keselowski, the 2012 Cup champion and RFK Racing co-owner, posted an opinion on X after a football game. “Watching football—’Wish TV would zoom the cameras out…,'” he wrote. The veteran then went on to add, “Watching racing – ‘Wish TV would zoom the cameras out….'” His point landed hard. Nowadays, modern broadcasts favor close-up shots that do not let viewers immerse in the full holistic view, making it tough to follow the full picture of what is happening.

In the 1990s, wide shots ruled on 4:3 TVs, showing the whole field angle at Talladega, as fans recall from classic broadcasts. Today, FOX’s style leans cinematic, with tight close-up shots or in-car zooms missing what is happening in the surroundings, like passes. Take Ryan Blaney‘s Martinsville run, for example; he started from the back at P31 and was in the mid-pack for most of the race. And the only reason Blaney got screen time was because he was in contention to be in the final 4.

Watching football-

“Wish TV would zoom the cameras out…”

Watching racing-

“Wish TV would zoom the cameras out…”

It’s impossible to understand or appreciate sports when the cameras are like this.
Maybe it’s just me 🤷🏼‍♂️

— Brad Keselowski (@keselowski) November 23, 2025

That’s why he gets very little screen time, and broadcasters talked very little about him until he got in the lead and finally finished P2. This is a prime example of how sometimes cameras are so zoomed in that the whole picture gets hidden. Keselowski nailed it: “It’s impossible to understand or appreciate sports when the cameras are like this.” Broadcasters chase drama, but the strategy of other drivers that they are applying to make the lead is never seen by fans on TV.

Perhaps that’s why Brad Keselowski went on to say a few years ago, “Whether it’s this rules packages or last year’s rules package, I just don’t feel like with the cameras zoomed in you can really appreciate all that’s going on. If I was sitting on my couch watching the race, the first thing I would say is, ‘Zoom the cameras out!’ That’s what I’m saying when I watch an Xfinity Series race or something. I think more so than any rules change, the biggest thing we can do is try to give a better perception of how much great racing there is across the whole field.”

What the NASCAR community often finds infuriating is when drivers go three or four wide during the race, the producer would inexplicably call for an in-car shot, which is often bought or paid for by a manufacturer or team sponsor. Or it would cut to a bumper camera, with the angle hyper-focused on two cars in the heat of a bigger battle.

And even when the restart settles down to largely single-file racing, the camera would pivot to a tight, single-car shot, forcing fans to miss out on battles that are only covered on social media. Perhaps that’s why Brad Keselowski’s words sparked a wave of agreement, proving he’s not alone in the booth.

Fans rally behind Brad Keselowski’s gripe

Take one reply that cut deep: “We bought bigger and wider TVs just for them to zoom all the way in. Insane.” It rings true as HD screens exploded post-2000, promising epic views, yet broadcasters zoom in that much, which kills the purpose of the bigger screen. Too much zooming in hides the field’s chaos, unlike early 2010s Talladega broadcasts, where wide infield cams caught every draft and action.

Shifting gears, another fan whispered a cheeky truth: “Shhh… sometimes your favorite sport is boring as hell. And wide-angle shots of, say, cars on a track or another play from scrimmage just need to be changed up. Tight shots of cheerleaders and hot umbrella girls are always welcome.” When the field is bunched up, wide angles would suffice in covering the action. Instead, NASCAR often switches to in-car or bumper cameras to spice things up.

“100%! Other NASCAR issues aside, the ultimate reason I tune in is I want to watch my favorite driver,” one wrote. “Every camera shot, I’m subconsciously looking for my favorite driver. If my driver is running even 15th for the day, I can watch a 3-hour broadcast and barely see him.” This comment is spot on, capturing the whole fan sentiment.

The Max cams introduced in 2025 cover all 40 cars, but traditional feeds capture only top runners, leaving out other drivers, which often sidelines or does not capture the mid-pack battles or incidents. And fans have to watch these mid-pack battles or incidents in the highlights only.

A bold take popped up next: “Hot take. I hate in-car cameras. The amount of racing we miss because they can’t stop cutting to shots where we see so little.” These in-car cameras debuted in ’83 for Yarborough’s win, and the camera angles make the viewers experience drivers very closely, but skip surrounding passing or wrecks. This gripe was echoed by many critiques, where they criticize of too many cockpit cuts over track-wide views.

Diving deeper, a fan is thanking Keselowski for voicing these issues. “HUGE thank you for voicing this!!! It’s because sports directors all wanted to be movie directors. Execs want drama/emotional connection rather than the competition itself.” FOX’s 2002 NASCAR deal birthed this Hollywood talk, as sports directors started to copy movie-like action-capturing tactics like swapping aero-wide shots for nostril zooms.

Wrapping the reactions, one football fan also echoed the camera angle issue, stating, “It’s terrible. Hate when I see a guy hit a hole, and it looks like it’s clear to the end zone, and suddenly there are 5 guys in front of him you’d never see because they zoom in so much.” Just like NASCAR’s trailing drivers, who are at the end of the pack, get very little screen time because of these tight camera angles.

For example, the 2009 Kentucky Derby win, where the horse was so far behind the leaders that the NBC Sports television coverage did not show him at all. The whole coverage was focused on the front-runners until he was already in the lead near the finish line. 

So it’s important for broadcasters to show the whole field as much as they can and add in-car camera angles or other close-up camera shots to keep things spiced up.