Topic: Bias of the mainstream auto reviewing media

[TopGun]

I'm wondering how many people out there share my opinion that the mainstream auto reviewing media have such a bias towards brands that it impacts their apparently independent view.

I never really noticed the departure of Lawrence Yap from the Star...perhaps because I stopped reading him...until this came up...

October 21, 2008
Porsche Cars Canada CEO departs suddenly

Mississauga, Ontario - Porsche Cars Canada Ltd. (PCL) announced the sudden departure of its President and CEO, Christian Marti, “due to a difference of opinion on the strategic direction of the company,” said company spokesperson, Laurance Yap.  Michael Bartsch, Executive VP & COO, Porsche Cars North America, based in Atlanta, Georgia, will act as interim President & CEO of PCL until a successor has been named.

The Canadian arm of Porsche Cars was set up in April of this year, and is a direct subsidiary of Porsche AG and the sole importer of Porsche sports cars and Cayenne SUVs to the Canadian market.

[Careener]

Interesting.
I remember when he started writing for the Star. His reviews were pretty bad and no matter what the vehicle was it was reviewed through the eyes of a boy racer. He did improve over the years.
Maybe he actually wanted to make some real money so went to work for Porsche.

[rrocket]

Oh, you didn't know Yap was a Porsche slappy???


My problem with the media is they rarely will say anything truly bad about a car...because they are scared of getting "blacklisted" and not getting more cars to review.

My other gripe is media types get too many bribes perks from car companies.  Here's a car for a week.  Or come join us for a lapping day.  Or we'll supply you a car for some event.  Stuff like that.  Get bribes like that make it difficult for a journalist to be honest or critical when reviewing cars...

[TopGun]

Oh, you didn't know Yap was a Porsche slappy???

My other gripe is media types get too many bribes perks from car companies.

Oh I knew he was a Porsche slappy...it was just so damn obvious that it made me ill.

I recall Kenzie getting a lot of grief over his business in Europe that rented Porshes, Audis & BMWs...so much so that they now print a tag-line on the bottom of the article stating the author of this ABC car ate at the ABC trough for a week provided for by ABC car company.

[rrocket]

^^Yea, exactly.  Just like in one of the mags the gave the guy a Dodge SRT8, mailed him and the car over to some of Europes finest roads for a few weeks.  Now honestly...and I understand it's more of a "feature" than an outright test...but is the author really going to say anything bad about the car, or possibly another Dodge given that he basically just got portions of a $10,000 vacation from the car company?

[initial_D]

My problem with the media is they rarely will say anything truly bad about a car...because they are scared of getting "blacklisted" and not getting more cars to review.

Don't free lance car writers get pay by the reviews? No car, no writing, no money. Can't really bite the hand that feeds you.

Car mags & newspaper depend on the ad$ from the car makers, so they probably have a guideline for the writers to limit the worst thing they can write about.

[wing]

Laurence got a job with Porsche -- obviously and he no longer writes reviews that would be a severe conflict of interest.

My problem with the media is they rarely will say anything truly bad about a car...because they are scared of getting "blacklisted" and not getting more cars to review.

This is perhaps partly true, but for the most part not really that I can tell -- lambasting a car might not be good for ones career, just like tell off your boss may not be the best move.

Most journalist have to get cars to write articles to sell to make money, if they don't get cars they don't get paid plain and simple.  If they don't get invited to events they don't get material to write they don't get paid -- it isn't "a perk" for most journalists to go to a track event it is just part of their job.  To you from the outside of course it looks like a perk, but many take it very seriously, some spent little time on the track and more time taking notes, pictures etc so they can write their articles, get interviews from the execs on hand for more material etc.

For me... it's a perk   Mostly because I get paid a flat amount whether I write anything or not

[rrocket]

 ...lambasting a car might not be good for ones career...

I guess having journalistic integrity is a thing of the past then, eh??

You proved the point exactly.  Don't say anything negative (even if it is the truth) or you might not get paid.  You've just stopped being a journalist when you do stuff like that....and become more of a shill of the car company. 

And it's definitely NOT the same as me telling my boss to stuff it.   

[wing]

You just have to read between the lines -- I can tell pretty easily when someone doesn't like a car even if they say nothing bad.  Usually they say nothing at all.

[dr_spock]

Yap always liked Porsche in his reviews.   I guess he got his dream job now.  

Toyota blacklisted Jim Kenzie if I recall.   That didn't seem to hurt his career.  

[rrocket]

You just have to read between the lines -- I can tell pretty easily when someone doesn't like a car even if they say nothing bad.  Usually they say nothing at all.

I shouldn't HAVE to read between the lines.  I'm trying to rely on your expertise as an auto reviewer to tell me things about the car without me having to drive it myself.  I don't think I'm being an a$$holes because I expect a bit of journalistic integrity and truth.....

[wing]

Well "we" haven't gotten a chrysler in a while or invited to any events because well we don't say nice things about them....

[initial_D]

You just have to read between the lines -- I can tell pretty easily when someone doesn't like a car even if they say nothing bad.  Usually they say nothing at all.

I shouldn't HAVE to read between the lines.  I'm trying to rely on your expertise as an auto reviewer to tell me things about the car without me having to drive it myself.  I don't think I'm being an a$$holes because I expect a bit of journalistic integrity and truth.....

What they write is their very opinions and pure feelings, they should be free to choose their own wording, even with sugar codings.

[Trainman]

This is of course not limited to the auto motive media.  I get very frustrated with "reviews" of model railway products that are basically no more than glorified ads.  It is the ad revenue for most media that allows them to survive, so you do not want to be biting the hand that feeds you.

The one clear exception to this is of course Consumers Reports/Consumers Union and yet how often do we jump all over them for their "biased" opinions?

[carcrazy]

In some cases I felt that the bias goes even further with manufacturers "suggesting" reviewers not to give good reviews to the competition – like don’t talk about many good things in a vehicle, but focus on the little negatives; or spin the numbers with some subjective assessments so one vehicle could be rated higher than another.

One other thing that bugged me many times is how little the reviewers know about the cars they are supposed to review - they don't even read the spec sheet.

This is the reason why I quit long time ago to take the opinions in these reviews seriously. I only use the performance numbers as a reference or basis for vehicles performance comparison.

I much more appreciate and listen to the owners’ opinions – good and bad.

[Careener]

I suppose an extreme example of this is when GM pulled its ads from the CA paper that Dan Neil was writing for.
He's hilarious.

[wing]

In some cases I felt that the bias goes even further with manufacturers "suggesting" reviewers not to give good reviews to the competition – like don’t talk about many good things in a vehicle, but focus on the little negatives; or spin the numbers with some subjective assessments so one vehicle could be rated higher than another.

That's crazy talk IMO.

[carcrazy]

In some cases I felt that the bias goes even further with manufacturers "suggesting" reviewers not to give good reviews to the competition – like don’t talk about many good things in a vehicle, but focus on the little negatives; or spin the numbers with some subjective assessments so one vehicle could be rated higher than another.

That's crazy talk IMO.

Maybe, maybe not...

It would be perfectly possible for the rep of the manufacturer A to tell his buddy jurno -"hey, we know the new car from manufacturer B is better than ours, but don't say that in your review."

 

[wing]

They could I guess but I have never heard of it and the PR people wouldn't do that -- that's silly talk.

 

[carcrazy]

They could I guess but I have never heard of it and the PR people wouldn't do that -- that's silly talk.

 

I don't think you would "hear" about it unless it would happen to you, which perhaps never did. Sure thing the PR people wouldn't do that  ... It's like saying the cops would never get corrupted.
 
I'm not talking about official positions of course, but raher off-the-record discussions that take place behind the scene (e.g. around a glass of expensive wine during one of those manufacturer-sponsored oversea events...).