Yes, even if "twice as often" was true, which it factually isn't, and hypothetically a previously launched rocket might actually be safer than a brandy-new one, it is still less than "throw them all away". Economically speaking, that is.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Articles re Tesla—Fact or Fiction?
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
Service can also be a problem because of the states. Several states don't even allow service centers. That means adjacent states have to handle the load. In some cases even those states are under limits as far as how many locations Tesla can have. It isn't as if Tesla isn't expanding. Here they added Roswell but it is already overwhelmed. There are growing pains and then there are GROWING pains. I do agree that they will continue for awhile. With the introduction of the Model Y and the Semi and then the truck, Tesla will be stressed for a long time.
Indeed, of the two SpaceX Falcon 9 launch (or pre-launch) failures, neither had anything to do with being reusable or reused, both were new.
Two recent losses of first stages on return, so net cost of 4 grid fins (assuming recent splash landing fins are reusable) and 8 legs (assuming they were reusable versions). Total sunk cost (sorry, didn't resist) totally made up for in one reuse.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
I agree in general - but I also think that Tesla's and Elon's relationship with the mainstream media goes way beyond overworked journalists making forgivable mistakes. Instead I think there's a core set of hardened anti-Elon and anti-Tesla FUDsters, right at the epicenter of mainstream journalism, who are doing incredible damage for dollars and giggles. That the rest of journalism follows them through news aggregation like lemmings is not an accident either, it's very much by design.
So yes, I think it's a factual and fair criticism that journalism as a profession and as a social group failed big time when it comes to news about Elon Musk and Tesla in 2018 - and there's no healing without acceptance of that plain fact.
Note that here I'm not promoting some sort of Trumpian conspiracy theory of 'everyone against us' mentality, with outright hostility against all journalists in essence, which poses a grave existential threat to them. Personally I'm very much willing to forgive past Tesla FUD the moment a journalists changes the tune on a water down the bridge basis, and things are slowly changing in that area. But I don't think it's constructive to fear the honest, factual criticism of this systemic failure of journalism that last year's Tesla and Elon reporting clearly was.
Last edited:
Exactly. I don’t wish to damn journalism with too broad a brush. Some journalists have been outstandingly helpful (e.g. Dan Neil of the WSJ). Journalists are professionals, and all those who haven’t exercised their own judgment, but rather just feed the echo chamber for clicks, need to be making some soul-searching New Years resolutions this morning.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
A lot of it is because EM went after journalists - that equated him to Trump. EM went so far as to say he will start a "Pravda" website to fact check journalists.
OT :
BTW, anyone following the '16 Dem primary knows how badly biased the MSM is. They always wrote bad things about Bernie. The '20 primary hasn't even started, but they are already going after Bernie with FUD articles - and trashing a real investigative journalist David Sirota for pointing to the pro-oil voting record of Beto (duh, he is from TX and married to a billionaire heiress) .
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Not advocating to bend the knee.
But, we need to understand why journalists have soured against EM. Using the language Trump uses is not helpful if he wants to point inaccuracies. He should ask Tesla comms team to do a point by point rebuttal of wrong articles instead of waging a general war against all journalists, good and bad.
Remember, it helps Trump but hurts Tesla.
tinm
2020 Model S LR+ Owner
Remember, behind the journalists are the editors. They call the shots, and they determine what gets in or not in, in the corporate media. So apply the question to editors. I wonder if it is simply that they made a decision a while ago that all things Elon/Tesla should be considered entertainment not hard news, kinda how for a while HuffPost put pre-election Trump campaign news into their entertainment section rather than politics/national news. I would love to know, and am hoping one day to find out, for instance, if Broder, now on the NYT Editorial Board, is the guiding hand behind some of the more atrocious articles that have come out since last summer, including the anti-Tesla op-eds.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Definitely they cover EM like they would cover any other celebrity. Pls, an unconventional CEO will get unconventional coverage.
But, if EM responds not like other celebrities, but like Peter Theil, he is going to get negative coverage like Peter Theil gets. Remember, all celebrities play this game, because it gets them free publicity. I'm sure some of Tesla's strategy is to use EM's celebrity power to sell the cars. If he starts wildly slashing against "journalists" then we see reports of "Is EM losing it ?". It doesn't make journalists change their behavior - it gets them more fodder to write negatively about EM. That is the reason he has to play the game smartly.
What is EM's mission ? He has to pick his battles.
ps : You can't also ignore the larger context - where POTUS calls journalists enemy of the people, there are hundreds of direct threats against journalists daily on social media - and countries from Russia to Turkey to Philippines to Brazil are imprisoning and killing journalists in thousands, even as their jobs are under threat and entire newspapers are shutting down regularly.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Unfortunately dishonest journalists are the enemy of the people since they spread lies. I don't think Elon said or implied that all journalists were bad but clearly in the case of Tesla and Elon there are a number who willingly skew negative at every chance.
dc_h
Active Member
Editors is the key. Lora and Dana often have positive articles, but seem to have to post boilerplate, erratic Elon bs. Probably doesn't help that they get beat up for some of the BS in their otherwise positive articles.
My thoughts are that the only way to combat the FUD is for Tesla to succeed. In 2018 almost every article I read on CNN/NYT/Bloomberg always prefaced Tesla with "money losing Tesla..." Bloomberg even had a animated graphic with Musk throwing money into the fire. In Q3 2018 Tesla took that away from them with their gangbuster quarter.
Another example in practice: The Gigafactory was a risky move that critics argued could bankrupt Tesla, but has been transformed into a brilliant business decision that is key to Tesla margins and ability to scale EV production.
I also agree with others that mentioned the state of online media having reduced the game to who gets the most clicks and ad views. Case in point, one of my favorite blogs arstechnica.com This is a tech blog, yet there's been no reporting on any of the cool tech this year when it comes to Tesla, from V9 software upgrades to Model 3 reviews. Almost every article is a FUD headline and is designed to drive clicks ad views and interactions (like comments). Their main auto reviewer has lamented several times that the reason they have not done a Model 3 review is that Tesla has not offered them a review car even though they have asked many times. (Seems obvious to me as to why)
I think the motivation for these sites is mostly financial as the controversy boosts the bottom line. It reminds me of the time when the platform wars waged over Apple vs Wintel (Microsoft & Intel). But there's another aspect that I think plays a part and that's that Tesla's priced the Model 3 at a price point higher than most of these tech writers can afford which at least subconsciously makes it a car for the elite, which brings out the hate.
“Enemy of the people” is a very bad phrase to use. The majority of people calling journalists liars are in fact covering for a downright evil administration that has lied countless times per day. The media serves a very important part in out democracy and is needed more than ever.
Tesla has been unfortunately caught in a very unusual bubble where short sellers manipulate the media to make profit and Tesla represents a paradigm shift that will take money away from thousands of people. Some of those people control the media. We should attack that media where it manipulates without vilifying all media.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Which is why I specifically said dishonest media, and put the dishonest part in bold.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
That's not what Trump means when he says they are the enemy of the people. He is talking about journalists who expose his corruption etc.
Last edited:
EVNow
Well-Known Member
That is not the only meaning of dishonest media. It could be construed as a generic attack. You have to be careful when using the exact same language as fascists do.
Listen to Kara's Recode interview again.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
When members of the media are dishonest that's how they should be labeled. There is literally no other word which would be more accurate.
Similar threads
