NYT article: Stalled on the EV Highway

[anticitizen13.7]

I have a real problem with this response from the New York Times.

The editor writes:

In addition, Mr. Broder left himself open to valid criticism by taking what seem to be casual and imprecise notes along the journey, unaware that his every move was being monitored. A little red notebook in the front seat is no match for digitally recorded driving logs, which Mr. Musk has used, in the most damaging (and sometimes quite misleading) ways possible, as he defended his vehicle’s reputation.

What "seem to be"???

WTF, the logs demonstrated conclusively that Mr. Broder reported inaccurate events, particularly related to the speed of the Model S. There is no "seem to be" about this.

Is this the New York Times, or Fox News?

Maybe it doesn't matter.

Both the New York Times and Mr. Broder have clearly been on the losing end of this controversy.

 

[stevezzzz]

As usual, the Canadians get it right

Mostly right: he says that the Model S won MT 2012 Car of the Year (it's actually 2013's CotY) and named the reporter of the NYT Times piece as Josh Broder (!).

 

[William13]

+1 BryanW. This was my reading too. No one, probably not even Broder "knows" his original intent. Many people don't understand their own motivations. They are often the ones who "protest too much".

I believe Elon did the right thing with his most recent tweet. He and Tesla will do better if they avoid a fight with the NYT. This was just a little spat.

 

[markwj]

Here's my conclusion that I submitted to NYT:

I must say that I am disappointed with this response.

Mr Musk made some serious allegations, and backed it up with hard data. Your response is both weak and inadequate to such allegations of journalistic misconduct.

Ignoring the poor note taking and arguably incorrect interpretations (such as 49 minutes vs 58 minutes, looking for the chargers vs driving around in circles, etc), Mr Musk did provide two sets of data that specifically refute claims made by Mr Broder in his article:
(a) That the cabin heat was not set anywhere near so low that "my feet were freezing and my knuckles were turning white", and
(b) That the "cruise control set at 54 miles per hour" was incorrect and Mr Broder drove at significantly faster speeds.

Mr Broder's suggested explanation (wheel size) for the speed difference between his report and the vehicle logs provided is utterly implausible - as I am sure the technical engineers have already explained to you.

Whilst it is debatable whether these attributes of the drive (speed and heat levels) would have impacted the outcome, what is not debatable is that Mr Broder both exaggerated and lied in these aspects of his report.

Defending such reporting is not worthy of the New York Times I used to respect.

I suggest that the New York Times needs to retract the article, and publicly apologise to Tesla for those aspects incorrectly reported. Anything less and you become complicit in these falsehoods and shoddy journalistic practices.

 

[Seegem]

Here's my conclusion that I submitted to NYT:

Extremely well said, thank you

+1

 

[Discoducky]

So when has Broder ever reviewed another car or piece of technology? I found none. I believe the biggest mistake in all of this was letting someone who may not drive much or have a smartphone to review a car and new technology. Basically, I would expect this level of inadequacies from a n00b who seemingly did not "Read The Manual". What I would not expect is that these inadequacies would trump the truth when published in a major newspaper. I expect bias, to some extent, but why not admit when you are wrong for a guy who does not review cars or technology? Why not offer to do it again, but with someone who can read a manual, has car review experience and hopefully can use/charge a smartphone?

...and let's say that NYT reviews another car or piece of tech in the future. I wonder what journalist(s) will do that review?

There's a plethora of tech journalists: Technology News - The New York Times
and a few car reviewers as well: Buy, Sell or Research a New or Used Car - New York Times - The New York Times

 

[retinadoc]

My comment:

Dear Ms. Sullivan,

As someone who is obviously a gifted wordsmith, I hope you can see the contradictions inherent in your chosen title. Reporting integrity only exists in the setting of reasonable judgement and the precise and unbiased communication of factual information. If these were missing from Mr. Broder's article as you seem to imply, and Tesla's logs undeniably prove, then the article is factually inaccurate and therefore fatally flawed.


Other newspapers get a free pass in playing loose with the facts. The New York Times is rightly held to a much higher standard which the literate world depends on.


You are mistaken if you think that the hundreds of emails you received were from a bunch of car nuts defending their pretty new toy. Our continued dependence on oil damages the planet, is a cancer limiting economic growth, and has cost many American lives in the Middle East. Tesla has universally been acknowledged for creating a remarkable car that is a quantum leap forward toward a future of responsible and sustainable energy use. This issue is far larger than a poor car review by one inept reporter. The Times needs to recognize the damage this article has caused to both Tesla and electric vehicles in general. You have a fundamental responsibilty to your readers to make sure that the facts that are reported are entirely accurate. If it is your opinion that Mr. Broder failed to do so, the Times should without question retract the article.

 

[stevezzzz]

My comment:

Dear Ms. Sullivan,

As someone who is obviously a gifted wordsmith, I hope you can see the contradictions inherent in your chosen title. Reporting integrity only exists in the setting of reasonable judgement and the precise and unbiased communication of factual information. If these were missing from Mr. Broder's article as you seem to imply, and Tesla's logs undeniably prove, then the article is factually inaccurate and therefore fatally flawed.


Other newspapers get a free pass in playing loose with the facts. The New York Times is rightly held to a much higher standard which the literate world depends on.


You are mistaken if you think that the hundreds of emails you received were from a bunch of car nuts defending their pretty new toy. Our continued dependence on oil damages the planet, is a cancer limiting economic growth, and has cost many American lives in the Middle East. Tesla has universally been acknowledged for creating a remarkable car that is a quantum leap forward toward a future of responsible and sustainable energy use. This issue is far larger than a poor car review by one inept reporter. The Times needs to recognize the damage this article has caused to both Tesla and electric vehicles in general. You have a fundamental responsibilty to your readers to make sure that the facts that are reported are entirely accurate. If it is your opinion that Mr. Broder failed to do so, the Times should without question retract the article.

Thanks for that, retinadoc: well said.

But now that Elon Musk is apparently ready to let the whole thing go, I think it's time we moved on, too. There's little to be gained by rehashing what we already know; and badgering the NYT isn't going to get us what we want.

Meanwhile, I'll drive my Model S daily, with a huge grin on my face, secure in the knowledge that it's the best car I've ever owned and delighted that my entire charging regimen consists of plugging it in at night in my garage, where it happily suckles on electrons I replace from my rooftop solar PV system. When I decide to take it on a road trip I'll exercise normal care and have a much better experience than Mr. Broder did. But if I do flatline the battery pack through my own negligence I won't blame Tesla. And I won't whine to the New York Times.

 

[rolosrevenge]

Thanks for that, retinadoc: well said.

But now that Elon Musk is apparently ready to let the whole thing go, I think it's time we moved on, too. There's little to be gained by rehashing what we already know; and badgering the NYT isn't going to get us what we want.

Meanwhile, I'll drive my Model S daily, with a huge grin on my face, secure in the knowledge that it's the best car I've ever owned and delighted that my entire charging regimen consists of plugging it in at night in my garage, where it happily suckles on electrons I replace from my rooftop solar PV system. When I decide to take it on a road trip I'll exercise normal care and have a much better experience than Mr. Broder did. But if I do flatline the battery pack through my own negligence I won't blame Tesla. And I won't whine to the New York Times.

Agreed. It still makes me upset about the whole situation, but there's nothing really left to do, except post the occasional Broder dig after a successful supercharger trip.

 

[Norbert]

As far as I understood, there were more journalists who wanted to do the Model S / Supercharger test drive on the east cost. On Wednesday's quarterly/annual report Q & A, Tesla is likely to say something about it. Advocates, bloggers and others will present their "summary" of what "actually" happened, what was the "really" important aspect, trying to define history.

More people will drive that route, or similar ones, some in even colder temperatures. Tesla will continue to improve the Model S, its software, and electric car technology in general. Battery technology will continue to improve and allow even longer ranges and even faster charging, at lower prices. Our understanding of what the Model S can do (and also what not, yet) will grow, as well as our ability to clarify misperceptions in the public.

However Broder and TopGear are not alone, and one can't simply "move on". It is an ongoing discussion, and we have much to lose if we don't care.

 

[cdabel]

Considering that the editor supports her reporter's motives, I assume we can look forward to more unbiased reviews of electrical vehicles from Mr. Broder in the near future?

 

[Norbert]

Tesla Model S road trip drivers find success along NYTs failed drive route [w/video]

 

[vfx]

...
However Broder and TopGear are not alone,....

No they are not. Haters can still borrow, rent or even buy a Model S to write a trash review and Tesla will not have the logs to show malicious reporting. This is not over.

 

[Martini]

I'm particularly concerned by this in her piece.



So, it so happens, her brother is a fan of Tesla. If not, she would have sided with Mr Broder ? Really, this is how she conducts investigations and determines outcomes ? Very unprofessional, to say the least.

I shudder to think what would happen if an NYT "reporter" trashes my product (if I made one), I produce data to prove he misreported, but the NYT editor still sides with the reporter since none of her close relatives know about my product.

Yes, absolutely! This shows the level of investigation that went into the review: "Let's have the ombudsman, with no formal approach, have a chat with some people and then form an opinion". She wrote an article that tries to make everybody feel better, not one that really investigates Broder. Sad day for the NYT.

I have occasion to work with the media now and then. They are usually smart, well-meaning people with no subject matter expertise and who are working under very tight deadlines. This parses out as stupidity in many cases, which is a shame.

In the case of Broder, its less clear whether the stupidity is innocent or deliberate.

 

[rlawson4]

Their Public Editor basically is saying that Broder is an idiot. If we eliminate that he intentionally ran out of juice, then clearly he's stupid. If I had 50+ miles to go and the car said 30 miles, I would not go. He claims to have called Tesla for advise. I cannot imagine he explained his situation accurately. If he needed that simple a question answered, he could have asked a child. A child would have said you don't have enough to make the trip. So, look your reporter either had an agenda or was stone cold stupid.

 

[JRP3]

No they are not. Haters can still borrow, rent or even buy a Model S to write a trash review and Tesla will not have the logs to show malicious reporting. This is not over.

 

[NigelM]

News flash: CNBC just said they will be talking about Model S & NYT in a few minutes.

 

[NigelM]

CNBC report: not bad, driver obviously likes the car, typical mistakes on the numbers, lots of joking about what to do at rest stops.

They will be following the route up to Milford during the morning, so more live reports to come.

 

[DrJohnM]

News flash: CNBC just said they will be talking about Model S & NYT in a few minutes.

Here is the CNBC link Test Drives Underscore Teslas Highly Charged Year

A very good interactive interview just conducted

- - - Updated - - -

And the CNBC video from early this morning http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000148898

 

[Martini]

Their Public Editor basically is saying that Broder is an idiot. If we eliminate that he intentionally ran out of juice, then clearly he's stupid. If I had 50+ miles to go and the car said 30 miles, I would not go. He claims to have called Tesla for advise. I cannot imagine he explained his situation accurately. If he needed that simple a question answered, he could have asked a child. A child would have said you don't have enough to make the trip. So, look your reporter either had an agenda or was stone cold stupid.

I'm not arguing with you, but I'm a bit troubled by the inconsistency of this particular argument. When leaving a charging station with "enough" rated range but not charging fully, he was criticised for taking rated range too literally. When he left the second morning with only 32 miles rated range, he was criticised for not taking the range estimate seriously enough. Broder may be a tool, but I'm not sure we can have it both ways. I repeat again that poor real-world range estimation is a serious problem once we get beyond the more savvy early adopters.