Still, I must say I find it very hard to attribute a malicious motive to Consumer Reports not including folding seats in their review of Tesla Model X 90D. I would say Tesla's secrecy on new features and the long lead-times of traditional media outlets is a far more likely scenario.
Let us not forget, Consumer Reports makes a magazine, not merely an online blog. The Model X review is part of their January issue where presumably they print the same article (and probably already have printed) and put the same thing online... Consumer Reports Magazine | January 2017
Tesla launched the folding second row on November 3rd. It is quite possible the Model X review was written, finalized and sent to the printers before or around that same time (the editorial process of making monthly magazines adding delay still) - and more likelier still, the test itself was conducted before that time and the test reflected on what they were able to test.
Of course one could argue an editor should have paid attention and made updates to the story (possible at least on the web, if not in print), but I seriously doubt economic incentives, personal grudges etc. had anything to do with it.
Most likely reason is a culture of valuing rather traditionalist way of both making a magazine and buying perceived low-price-high-quality goods (with an American mainstream bias). Being an EV or appreciating/noting constant product changes does not factor that so much and frankly I'm not even sure it should.
It is OK for a magazine called Consumer Reports to have different priorities than changing the status quo. Early adopters/visionaries are different bunch.
Last edited:
