NYT article: Stalled on the EV Highway

[dpeilow]

Which is still not acceptable to commit to print.

- - - Updated - - -

ABB Global (@ABBgroupnews) tweeted at 2:03 PM on Wed, Feb 20, 2013:

@jbrodernyt For your next EV test drive, may we suggest the new ABB fast-charger network in (chilly) Estonia? World’s first nationwide EV charging network starts – based on ABB fast charger technology


Twitter / ABBgroupnews: @jbrodernyt For your next EV ...

 

[jcstp]

 

[Oyvind.H]

Which is still not acceptable to commit to print.

- - - Updated - - -

ABB Global (@ABBgroupnews) tweeted at 2:03 PM on Wed, Feb 20, 2013:

@jbrodernyt For your next EV test drive, may we suggest the new ABB fast-charger network in (chilly) Estonia? World’s first nationwide EV charging network starts – based on ABB fast charger technology


Twitter / ABBgroupnews: @jbrodernyt For your next EV ...

ABB really should not suggest that he tries fast charging in Estonia, as their fast chargers are CHAdeMO. And long distances in a Leaf/iMiev is not something you would like Broder to write about....

 

[dsm363]

That would be a very human response to a mistake.

True but reporters for the New York Times are held to a higher standard and their editor shouldn't double down and protect them when it is clear they made major mistakes in their reporting.

 

[jcstp]

I suggest they give him a phone with a lot of credit!
With so many charges to do, he will need it!

 

[dpeilow]

Looks like NYT's auto editor has been doing his best to keep the embers burning. Check the timeline of @NYTjamescobb.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Nice commentary here. Great read if you want to engage in some well written confirmation bias -

Electric Car Driving Lessons from Elon Musk and the New York Times - IEEE Spectrum

 

[dpeilow]

Thought it was over, but impressively out of touch NYT auto editor says: “@NYTjamescobb: Unaware of a single error of provable fact.” Wow -- Elon Musk (@elonmusk)

NYT Autos editor still stoking it. Think he also got a wrist slap?

 

[Norbert]

James Cobb (NYT) accuses Elon of misrepresenting Sullivan's last word on the matter, yet has this dialog: (these 3 tweets are in sequence, replies to each other)

James G. Cobb ‏@NYTjamescobb
@elonmusk 3 of 3: …but calling @jbrodernyt’s account “fake” was over the line & impugned reputation of a good man and a consummate pro.

Len Feldman ‏@lenfeldman
.@NYTjamescobb @elonmusk As your own public editor pointed out, @jbrodernyt was far from a "consummate pro," and you failed to fact-check.

James G. Cobb ‏@NYTjamescobb
@lenfeldman Unaware of a single error of provable fact.

- - - Updated - - -

...maybe he meant: from his point of view at that point in time. But that's not what it sounds like.

 

[dsm363]

A 'consummate pro' would have retracted some of his 'facts' after the data came out, not come up with excuses about bad cruise control or wheel sizes.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

True but reporters for the New York Times are held to a higher standard and their editor shouldn't double down and protect them when it is clear they made major mistakes in their reporting.

That's not how I read this at all... IMO the NYT people are all saying the same thing... clearly some mistakes were made and the end result was a BEV ran out of charge... it's not the first time a car has been on a flatbed and it wont be the last.

 

[artsci]

True but reporters for the New York Times are held to a higher standard and their editor shouldn't double down and protect them when it is clear they made major mistakes in their reporting.

The article was published on the editor's watch so to a considerable degree he also has to be accountable. That he's "unaware of a single error of probable fact" suggests to me that he's either a lousy editor or in total denial about Broder's amateurish job.

 

[dsm363]

The article was published on the editor's watch so to a considerable degree he also has to be accountable. That he's "unaware of a single error of probable fact" suggests to me that he's either a lousy editor or in total denial about Broder's amateurish job.

Exactly. We can never prove (without recordings of the phone calls which I'm sure didn't happen) what Tesla told him. The biggest red flag is Broder reporting that Tesla 'cleared' him to leave for a 65 mile trip with 32 miles of rate range. I know some here have leapt to the defense of Broder and the NYT at all costs but I'd like an explanation for that one. Either way, things like average speed, cabin temp and time charging are all facts that no one can argue unless you accuse Tesla of faking the data. Saying 'my reporter was a little sloppy in their not taking' without retracting the piece or at least writing an editorial comment at the top of the article is the sign of a bad editor I think.

 

[Norbert]

The article was published on the editor's watch so to a considerable degree he also has to be accountable. That he's "unaware of a single error of probable fact" suggests to me that he's either a lousy editor or in total denial about Broder's amateurish job.

typo: Provable, not "probable"
Just to avoid misunderstandings.

- - - Updated - - -

So: Does he think the vehicle logs are not proof, or do they talk about him fact-checking (or not) before publication? Or is it just distraction etc? Or does he not even know what he is talking about?

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

The biggest red flag is Broder reporting that Tesla 'cleared' him to leave for a 65 mile trip with 32 miles of rate range. I know some here have leapt to the defense of Broder and the NYT at all costs but I'd like an explanation for that one.

Imagine for a moment that you have limited EV experience and woke up after a good nights sleep and found your Model S range had diminished from 90 miles to 25 miles. Then imagine that you followed Tesla's instruction to "condition" the battery and despite being assured this would recover the range it actually left the car predicting 19 miles. What would that do to your confidence in the technology? Would it possibly encourage you to mistrust the cars instrumentation and put unreasonable trust in Tesla's personnel on the end of the phone? If it did then leaving Norwich after an hour with 32 miles range predicted and Tesla's promise that this would improve on route is completely understandable.

We all know this trip is possible if you follow the rules... we also now know for sure that if you don't things end badly... we don't need a conspiracy for this, just a driver who makes mistakes, an EV that's still in development, and Tesla support who need some additional training.

 

[dsm363]

That's my point exactly. A normal person would think the numbers were more rosy that reality and that was his experience, right? Why would any sane person then take off with half the range when everything they had experienced in the 250 miles before had shown them that they don't get anywhere close to the rated range?

This is assuming that's what Tesla told him which I highly doubt. The people at Tesla actually trust those numbers and understand cold weather EV driving. Tesla would never tell him the numbers would improve after he drove 25 miles and then charged for an hour since the pack is already warm at that point. He said he talked with Tesla engineers too so they would know that. You're saying they would tell a NYT reporter with a national audience to 'go for it!'? Ok.

 

[Norbert]

We all know this trip is possible if you follow the rules... we also now know for sure that if you don't things end badly... we don't need a conspiracy for this, just a driver who makes mistakes, an EV that's still in development, and Tesla support who need some additional training.

If that were all we knew, then "makes mistakes", by itself, would already be enough of an explanation.

However, we know much more than that: The article itself documenting, for example, lack of basic knowledge about the car's features, and, for example, the logs at Model S Efficiency and Range | Blog | Tesla Motors

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

Why would any sane person then take off with half the range when everything they had experienced in the 250 miles before had shown them that they don't get anywhere close to the rated range?

Because the Tesla people on the end of the phone assured him that everything would be OK. I'm sure everyone on both ends of that conversation was reeling from the overnight range drop.

This is assuming that's what Tesla told him which I highly doubt.

And none of us can ever really know... I'm willing to believe NYT because I see no need for a conspiracy or fabricated story... you clearly see some agenda... I think we will just have to disagree :smile:

The people at Tesla actually trust those numbers and understand cold weather EV driving. Tesla would never tell him the numbers would improve after he drove 25 miles and then charged for an hour since the pack is already warm at that point. He said he talked with Tesla engineers too so they would know that. You're saying they would tell a NYT reporter with a national audience to 'go for it!'? Ok.

Well, one persons 'engineer' is another persons 'customers relations manager'... I don't think we can put much weight on that statement.

As I said before, I can easily see how a Tesla rep on the end of the phone would get this wrong... maybe Tesla should issue statements from those people so we know what was said?

- - - Updated - - -

However, we know much more than that: The article itself documenting, for example, lack of basic knowledge about the car's features, and, for example, the logs at Model S Efficiency and Range | Blog | Tesla Motors

None of which proves anything.... if Tesla had an unassailable case they would have forced NYT to issue a full retraction or pursue this through the legal process... they have done neither.

 

[Norbert]

None of which proves anything.... if Tesla had an unassailable case they would have forced NYT to issue a full retraction or pursue this through the legal process... they have done neither.

Given the downsides of suing a major newspaper, and that nobody would like to do that in the first place, that's a non-sequitur.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

Given the downsides of suing a major newspaper, and that nobody would like to do that in the first place, that's a non-sequitur.

Not at all... they went after the BBC and Top Gear