Netflix’s Drive to Survive reaches a new low, distorting reality and shielding the accused while silencing the victim in an ongoing scandal.
As every year, the start of the F1 season is an opportunity for TV and VOD platform fans to dive into even more content about the premier category on Netflix. For seven years now, Drive to Survive has been released annually between January and March, offering a behind-the-scenes look at Formula 1.
This year is no different, though with a later release, as previous seasons were available around winter testing. As always, F1Lead received early access to the series, and yours truly launched the first episode with a mix of excitement and skepticism.
On a personal note, I am among those who are somewhat critical of the series each year, yet still eager to explore the exclusive visual content it offers, granting viewers access to the inner workings of Formula 1.
Despite an entertainment-driven approach that sometimes feels excessive and the shortcuts taken to create a more intense rhythm—akin to a movie or scripted series—there was still an appreciation for the human aspects of the sport, captured by cameras skillfully positioned to enhance storytelling.
With this awareness of Drive to Survive as a sometimes indigestible product, but also with the hope of finding some compelling scenes to enjoy, we began watching the episodes provided in advance.
It all started off rather well.
If you’re familiar with our Drive to Survive reviews, you know there’s usually a spoiler-free section followed by one featuring specific dialogue excerpts or detailed moments from the series.
That won’t be the case this time, as this review will be brief. Yet, the opening minutes were engaging, featuring the announcement of Lewis Hamilton’s move to Ferrari and the varied reactions from figures like Toto Wolff, as well as Carlos Sainz’s hesitation over contacting Mercedes F1.
But within minutes, the focus shifts, and the Horner case takes center stage, dominating more than half the episode. The first images depict a visibly uncomfortable Christian Horner in public following accusations from his former assistant, Fiona Hewitson, concerning harassment and inappropriate behavior.
A delicate angle, seemingly intended to highlight the unease within Red Bull and the toxic atmosphere developing there. However, after a few more reactions from journalists and team principals, the tone shifts—for the worse.
From that point on, the episode turns into a report on how Christian Horner fights off attacks, both on the case itself and on a personal level, attempting to navigate the crisis.
A completely appalling approach, as the alleged victim—who recently decided to take the matter to court—is neither named nor given any real mention. Meanwhile, the episode instead follows Horner reveling in Red Bull’s success and seeking reassurance from a team whose unity only seems to strengthen.
Acting like a secondary PR service for Red Bull, production company Box to Box presents Horner insulting Zak Brown—who merely called for transparency—Geri Horner comforting her husband in the garage, and Red Bull’s communications team complaining that no one is asking about performance.
Avoiding the Topic Would Have Been More Dignified and Respectful
Through its staging, its focus on Horner’s expressions and his team’s reactions, its exaggeration of the stakes surrounding Red Bull, and its attempt to shift the blame onto the media and rivals, Drive to Survive reaches a new low.
The case isn’t even closed—Christian Horner has merely issued a gag order preventing British media, previously the primary source of information, from covering the matter. Yet, Box to Box Films has chosen to portray him as the victim.
Even though he has been cleared by investigations—whose transparency remains questionable—following the initial revelations, Horner still faces a professional tribunal and remains accused.
If he is the accused, then why is the victim made invisible? Why is her name not even mentioned? Why is there no clear account of the allegations against Horner, which, it should be reminded, involve sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior?
Why is only the accused given a voice, handed a platform to defend himself and protect his image—while the accuser and presumed victim are implicitly cast as a liar and a defamer?
Questions to which we have no answers, as it seemed far easier to embrace hypocrisy and completely sidestep the issue—something that would have been fairer to Fiona Hewitson and more respectful to the thousands of victims who endure such behavior every day.
By addressing this sordid affair, Netflix took a risk. But in choosing this angle, the producers have entirely discredited Drive to Survive, which had no need for this. The usual criticisms of its trivialities now seem insignificant compared to what has been done in this seventh season.
After watching this episode, we have decided not to give the show any further attention, not to promote it, and instead to voice our outrage—explaining why you will not find our usual review of the series.
- Discover More>Ferrari’s Future: D’Ambrosio to Share Vasseur’s Load
- Follow us on >Facebook and >Twitter for F1 updates
Drive to Survive S7: A Questionable Editorial Choice Drive to Survive S7: A Questionable Editorial Choice Drive to Survive S7: A Questionable Editorial Choice
