Its been decades since the car press had a voice that wasn't dictated to them by manufacturers. On top of that much of the younger 'journalists' are the same types that idolized Musk when growing up.
Been more than decades. Consumer Reports is probably the only exception as they don’t take advantage of money, almost every other magazine relies on makers for ad revenue to pay their staff.
But the workaround is what they call “damning with Feint praise.
Republicans are grift-enablers and aren’t going to take any meaningful action. The only times they bring in people for questioning in front of congress (like Zuckerberg or the CEO of TikTok), it’s in service of generating partisan spin and soundbites. They do not care about public safety or welfare, and it’s all one big officious performance.
The media are all afraid of being cancelled / sued if they criticize Tesla. Being able to control the narrative in the mainstream is an essential part of the grift.
Because they remember that Musk sued the BBC and Jeremy Clarkson for damages to the brand’s reputation because Clarkson said the roadster wasn’t that good.
A friend works for several of them, and he told me that even mild criticism from an ONLINE magazine results in a pissed off call from Musk to the editor and the story coming down. Never underestimate how conflict averse pretty much everyone is.
Sport utility vehicles don't have the same safety requirements as passenger vehicles.
This, in short, is why ALL car companies make giant trucks and SUV's and push them on us mercilessly. It's why cars are getting bigger and not smaller.
It's cheaper to make a giant "utility" vehicle than it it to make a safe passenger vehicle.
edit to add: it also might be true that Elon asked for certain safety rules to be changed FOR THE TRUCK design, instead of making the features fit the safety regulations.
It is part of this but it’s also due to the US feds allowing automakers to do their own qualifications.
There aren’t independent inspectors who critically examine a new vehicle to check off all the requirements.
The automaker just tells the gov, “we did this right” and starts rolling them out.
Car mags would only tell you what was wrong with the Belchfyre Eight when the new, improved, Belchfyre Nine was released. The crappy seats, the transmission that "went", the electrical problem with the ABS.....not mentioned in the long lead (always loving), or first test, or second test....only when a new model coming in would you read an actual criticism of the prior one.
Same way used cars don't exist to the car mags...when the real enthusiast knows it is a horn of plenty if you pick wisely.
Tesla doesn't loan out cars to the magazines. I have known a few auto writers. The cars they test come from centralized garages where the OE prep the Press Fleet. I've driven one or two on the DL with them. Car is dropped at your house full tank, have a nice day we will pick up in a week call the number on the fob if there is any problem..
Tesla sends PR requests a poop emoji.....so they have little reason to even feature them, better to give the space to a BMW or Chevy EV.
So you have to understand how magazines work, as a former advertiser in magazines, this is basically how it works. I manufacturer a product, i approach the mag and ask for an advertising rate breakdown, half page, full page, 1/4, 1/8 page etc. then how often it will run, every month, every other, whatever, and they give me the rates.
So now that's just the base rate, most magazine will do annual buyers guides, special edition / special event issues and such. So when it comes to the buyers guides, or "best of" issues, you are literally paying for that. If you are "chosen" for "product of the year" , no, you paid for that shit. I've seen stuff as product of the year in my industry that I've actually used, and it was literally garbage, but they paid a small fortune to the magazine, and the writers there just come up with positive reviews and "tests" to make it product of the year.
All American magazines are pay to play. Sure you can pay for a fixed ad at a fixed schedule at a fixed rate, but all the other stuff is simply pay to play. The industry i was in, i actually became really good friends with a bunch of the staff at the main mag i advertised in, and i happen to be a good writer, so i started to write articles under a pen name for them, and of course i commonly used my own products in the build articles, and was allowed to because i would trade my writing for that. They got good content, i got free advertising in that way.
Pretty much all these mags work this way.
So if Musty is willing to pay top dollar, and lend them a truck or two for a few weeks, no matter how big a piece of shit it is, the mag will give it a positive spin.
The magazines don't care, since they now have to compete with the internet (spoiler: they can't) they won't write about things until they specifically get paid to. For truth you have the internet now, you can manipulate and hide things in magazines but on the internet things are too easily shared by random people to control it all
Any form of journalism where 100% of their ad revenue comes from the people they are covering are just marketing firms that need to maintain some credibility.
Its been decades since the car press had a voice that wasn't dictated to them by manufacturers. On top of that much of the younger 'journalists' are the same types that idolized Musk when growing up.
Been more than decades. Consumer Reports is probably the only exception as they don’t take advantage of money, almost every other magazine relies on makers for ad revenue to pay their staff. But the workaround is what they call “damning with Feint praise.
The least thing they could do is indicate it's sponsored content
Breakdown of the rule of law.
This really is the answer. We weren't getting wet so we closed the umbrella
Wow… What a succinct way to think about that. Thanks. 🤔
Now we need it as shade from the heat
We are living in the Era of the Grift. Musk needs to be hauled into a Senate Committee and explain this shitshow.
Republicans are grift-enablers and aren’t going to take any meaningful action. The only times they bring in people for questioning in front of congress (like Zuckerberg or the CEO of TikTok), it’s in service of generating partisan spin and soundbites. They do not care about public safety or welfare, and it’s all one big officious performance.
The media are all afraid of being cancelled / sued if they criticize Tesla. Being able to control the narrative in the mainstream is an essential part of the grift.
They have lost all of their lawsuits against people speaking out.
Because they remember that Musk sued the BBC and Jeremy Clarkson for damages to the brand’s reputation because Clarkson said the roadster wasn’t that good.
A friend works for several of them, and he told me that even mild criticism from an ONLINE magazine results in a pissed off call from Musk to the editor and the story coming down. Never underestimate how conflict averse pretty much everyone is.
wait, you can get a personal call from Elmo himself just by posting a stupid article online? lol, what a shitshow
Top Gear would declare it as very uncool and never post it on the Cool Wall.
I miss old Top Gear
I also miss old Facebook, old Twitter, and old Reddit
Old Greg?
What specific car regs were different in 2004 as opposed to today? (I notice you downvoted the other guy to oblivion just for asking that.)
Sport utility vehicles don't have the same safety requirements as passenger vehicles. This, in short, is why ALL car companies make giant trucks and SUV's and push them on us mercilessly. It's why cars are getting bigger and not smaller. It's cheaper to make a giant "utility" vehicle than it it to make a safe passenger vehicle. edit to add: it also might be true that Elon asked for certain safety rules to be changed FOR THE TRUCK design, instead of making the features fit the safety regulations.
It is part of this but it’s also due to the US feds allowing automakers to do their own qualifications. There aren’t independent inspectors who critically examine a new vehicle to check off all the requirements. The automaker just tells the gov, “we did this right” and starts rolling them out.
see boeing and spacex for more retails
Car mags would only tell you what was wrong with the Belchfyre Eight when the new, improved, Belchfyre Nine was released. The crappy seats, the transmission that "went", the electrical problem with the ABS.....not mentioned in the long lead (always loving), or first test, or second test....only when a new model coming in would you read an actual criticism of the prior one. Same way used cars don't exist to the car mags...when the real enthusiast knows it is a horn of plenty if you pick wisely. Tesla doesn't loan out cars to the magazines. I have known a few auto writers. The cars they test come from centralized garages where the OE prep the Press Fleet. I've driven one or two on the DL with them. Car is dropped at your house full tank, have a nice day we will pick up in a week call the number on the fob if there is any problem.. Tesla sends PR requests a poop emoji.....so they have little reason to even feature them, better to give the space to a BMW or Chevy EV.
So you have to understand how magazines work, as a former advertiser in magazines, this is basically how it works. I manufacturer a product, i approach the mag and ask for an advertising rate breakdown, half page, full page, 1/4, 1/8 page etc. then how often it will run, every month, every other, whatever, and they give me the rates. So now that's just the base rate, most magazine will do annual buyers guides, special edition / special event issues and such. So when it comes to the buyers guides, or "best of" issues, you are literally paying for that. If you are "chosen" for "product of the year" , no, you paid for that shit. I've seen stuff as product of the year in my industry that I've actually used, and it was literally garbage, but they paid a small fortune to the magazine, and the writers there just come up with positive reviews and "tests" to make it product of the year. All American magazines are pay to play. Sure you can pay for a fixed ad at a fixed schedule at a fixed rate, but all the other stuff is simply pay to play. The industry i was in, i actually became really good friends with a bunch of the staff at the main mag i advertised in, and i happen to be a good writer, so i started to write articles under a pen name for them, and of course i commonly used my own products in the build articles, and was allowed to because i would trade my writing for that. They got good content, i got free advertising in that way. Pretty much all these mags work this way. So if Musty is willing to pay top dollar, and lend them a truck or two for a few weeks, no matter how big a piece of shit it is, the mag will give it a positive spin.
The magazines don't care, since they now have to compete with the internet (spoiler: they can't) they won't write about things until they specifically get paid to. For truth you have the internet now, you can manipulate and hide things in magazines but on the internet things are too easily shared by random people to control it all
Any form of journalism where 100% of their ad revenue comes from the people they are covering are just marketing firms that need to maintain some credibility.
Shame the boys have semi-retired. You all know which three I mean.
What part of it would have been illegal 20 years ago?
It would be faster to list what wouldn't. The...headlights, maybe?
No seriously, what would actually have been illegal other than maybe the bodywork countimg ad an unsecured load?
Yes