ℬête Noire
Active Member
Not sure what you saw in the article that's not accurate.
...
The only thing about that I'd dispute is the implied assertion in the title of this thread connecting this to the "disappearance" of the $35K Model 3. "Delay" would be the right word - "disappearance"? No way.
It's dripping with innuendo, trying to imply that the $35,000 vehicle is not going to happen. FUD SOP. Also check out the "promoted" post. Not written by the author but staff promoted but endorsed by the staff (I don't know who handles that).
It's closer to accurate than the Gitlin (the Cars editor) and most Farivar pieces there, I generally don't bother read those anymore. It has come to the point I normally check the byline before reading. Those are flat out embarrassing (not just in the ones with Tesla at the top, even).
P.S. The site's other departments have also delved into writing Musk articles in general. Those tend to be handled better, but grate on me because they are done for the "clicks". Explicitly, that's what it is. Why do I care bespoke private school Musk is running for his kids? *shrug* Their SpaceX coverage, by a different department obviously, is decent and evenhanded (although written in a general pro-doing-stuff-in-space bias) and covers all the players (from NASA, to Russians, Europe, Blue Orgin, the established US companies, etc.).