Sorry if this already got posted (conf call in 1 min, no time to Volkerize!), but great video debate on the Broder controversy from Motor Trend:
I had not seen this-- thank you for posting!
I'm bumping this so it doesn't get buried in the distractions. I agree with riceuguy on the quality of the discussion.
They excused Broder's attempted sabotage as "mistakes", though.
Hmmm. While attempting to be balanced and fair, in which they mostly succeeded, I think they were too easy on a reporter (Broder) who actively tried to sabotage the trip. MT chalked it up to driver inexperience. IMO I think it was far worse.
One point that was right on: don't mess with Elon Musk!
Brian H - you were quicker to my point. Agree.
Very subtlly they suggested that he was looking for the bad. They put forth that some reporters go into a new technology with a lot of negativity. Using a modern smart review expecting the same performance as a home computer.
I think they did a good job at looking at it in a balanced way. There is no way for them to know for sure so calling brod out would make no sense. Made a lot of good points on knowing the vehicle before you drive it.
As reporters they give their colleague the benefit of the doubt, but in essence they are merely suggesting he could just be stupid rather than malicious. That is indeed plausible!
I disagree- that level of stupid doesn't achieve professional journalism at NY Times....
Maybe the Times thinks differently- in that case I'm wrong
@kenliles, just saying it's plausible, not likely! :-)
Amongst Broder's "mistakes" was missing a line of 6 chargers lit up like daylight right at the entrance to a smallish parking lot, causing him to drive around the lot about 15 times in 5 minutes with the gauge showing 0 miles.
Where I come from, we call such mistakes "attempted sabotage".
Spot on Brian
While it is fine for us to have such opinions, and understand I share yours Brian H, they are not provable because only Broder knows if he is utterly stupid or malicious. MT's opinion v-blog cant become a judge and jury for this case, slamming Broder for doing what we all believe to be true. It isn't the style or point of the show.
And thus, I think they went as close to calling him out by being intentionally negative As they were able to do.
It's always nice to hear from professionals, who actually KNOW what they are talking about. With that said, I agree 100% with their prospective.
I read on this board and a few others, where someone bought the MS after not doing any homework on the vehicle. Sorry but, EVERY vehicle and new technology today has its limitations, and anyone who doesn't do their homework before jumping into bed with it, should never complain about the product. I put my deposit down back in 2010 knowing FULL WELL everything being reported by Tesla about the MS was not rock-solid at that point. However, knowing what I knew about the Tesla Roadster with a fair amount of research, and knowing my needs, I could clearly ascertain that it was the perfect vehicle for my needs and desires. All the extras that came later, as more was announced about it, was just extra icing on the cake (so to speak).
But when I read on this board (etc) people that clearly didn’t know WTF they were buying, and what its limitations were, I am sorry to say… shame on YOU!
"They excused Broder's attempted sabotage as "mistakes", though."
Speculating on a forum is one thing, but in a publication, I think it is only right that they give him the benefit of the doubt. Other than his apparent stupidity, there is no direct evidence that Broder was malicious, and his explanations for his behavior are plausible.
He couldn't find the chargers at Milford? Plausible? In the Land of Maroons, maybe.
I give up. Where is the Land of Maroons?
Bugs would be enchanted.