I never understood the concept of an automotive-related news embargo. It's easy enough to see what's in it for the carmaker. They can time their marketing and promotion campaign to coincide with the "reveal." They can use the embargo to play favorites. But why would any self-respecting automotive journalist agree to hold onto a story for the convenience of the manufacturer? It's one of those carrot and stick deals. The carrot: primo access to future stories/products. The stick: NOT getting primo access to future stories/products. Either way, any scribe that allows a carmaker to manipulate the journalistic process through a news embargo is guilty of collusion. (That's just a fancy way of saying "selling out.") From my perspective, it's like this: I get the information. I publish the information. My primary responsibility is to my readers. Period. if you don't want me to publish info until Friday, don't give it to me until Friday. And if I find a way to get it before Friday, that's your tough luck. So if there are any news organizations out there who agree with me, but don't want to get their ass kicked by the carmakers, here's an invitation. Send TTAC the info and we'll break the embargo. And once we break it, you're free to follow suit. That way we can work together to end this perfidious practice once and for all.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
That was one of the best podcasts in awhile.
I think the Mexican-Elmo-GM-shill voice should be a weekly feature.
The Lexus does look big to me, and I don’t know where Mr. Berkowitz gets the idea that it’s attractive in any way. And with an extra 32,000 $ I could put insulation in my walls (house built in the ’50s and they have none) AND get modern argon-filled double-pane windows, AND a new burner (the old one is original equipment) and probably save a lot more oil than the Lex hybrid would save me over the conventional. (I’m just now spending $5k-plus to bring the roof from R-little-more-than-nothing to R-40.)
Fun podcast. Thanks, guys
Great call Robert.
OK here are my thoughts on embargoes.
1. They do serve the reader in one way. They’re actually getting official, fully informed information. When it’s leaked, broken etc, some of the sites that run with it don’t have the actual release, they’re going off of what’s on a blog etc. How does that serve a reader or consumer? Not well. Not good journalism.
2. There is only one reason publications break embargoes. Traffic. Meaning Money. You name the site that’s why they’re doing it. you’re making a point on this site but still I doubt you’ll argue with the bump in traffic.
3. You’re thinking the automotive industry can move on an instant. Reviewing a new CD is a lot easier to get out to thousands of journalists than a new Malibu. Logistically that is a reality you can’t argue with. Electronic images and press releases are a different story. I think you will see many more vehicles this year not being released to anyone until the midnight embargo and that leads me to #4.
4. As an automotive journalist the embargo breakers are forcing ME to stay up until midnight to do my job and serve my readers. Screw that.
Reverend Dave! Glad to have your thoughts on this subject.
[Mr. Thomas was a writer for TTAC back in the late Mesozoic period, and currently works over at Winding Road.]
1. I’m not quite sure how breaking an automaker’s embargo reduces the quality of the info released, or even if that’s particularly important. (I reckon every blog and site are responsible for the accuracy of their editorial.) Anyway, what we’re speaking about here is news organizations such as your own holding onto official (accurate?) information at the automaker’s behest. It creates a cozy little arrangement between automaker and publication. How is that good journalism?
2. I’m confused. Are you saying that breaking an embargo reveals some kind of financially-related moral/ethical weakness on the part of the embargo breaker? Surely trying to get out front with a story is as good for consumers as it is for the publication involved. And what’s wrong with making a buck? Don’t tell me that Winding Road is run as a public service.
3. Huh? It’s OK to embargo test drives because it’s difficult for the automaker to get all news outlets into the seat of a new car in a timely if not synchronized fashion? Explain why I, the publisher of an automotive website, should care whether or not an automaker has a tough time co-ordinating their press, PR and launch campaigns.
4. What can I say? I’m shocked– genuinely taken aback– by this statement about your personal priorities.
I’m actually at Cars.com and can’t speak to WRs reasoning for anything. My policy on the blog at Cars.com is to always abide by the embargo for a number of reasons.
1. we don’t have the same enthusiast following as many sites.
2. I don’t want to get anything wrong.
3. I can then mouth off from a high horse.
4. I don’t see it as cozy I see it as an easy way for me to plan my coverage instead of running around with my head cut off, rushing to get a story out because some yahoo on a blog somewhere broke an embargo.
You misunderstood what I said originally as well. I actually think all the info and photos should be released very close to the embargo time, if not on the minute. But you still need time to write and resize photos etc. Just the workload to get the information out takes time. I’ve worked with many automakers on that but it seems like the only thing they’ve decided works is waiting until the very last second before giving out the info. So it’s whoever is the fastest typer, photoshop expert gets the story out first. Which is fine, but to me reduces quality.
We don’t take anything from the automakers and have a strict editorial policy here so I don’t think we can really be attacked for being cozy with automakers just because we call them up to clarify statements in press releases to make sure information to our users is accurate.
Dave: I apologize for not keeping up with your brilliant career. And I’m delighted that cars.com has both a diligent, loyal scribe on board and a “strict editorial policy.” I assume that means no junkets or freebies of any kind without full disclosure of an automaker’s entire contribution to any and all reports, yes? Anyway, back to the fray… 1. I was under the impression you were against anyone breaking an embargo; or at least endorsing the idea of a news embargo. Are you telling me/us that it’s OK for an enthusiast site to break an embargo but cars.com won't because … they don't have to? I’m not sure I understand the distinction, but if you’re saying it’s OK for some publication, just not us, well, that’s something anyway. Is that the case? 2. Who does? Again, how does not breaking an embargo on official info detract from your desire for– or ability to achieve– editorial accuracy? 3. Again, huh? How does respecting an embargo embolden you? Are you being ironic? 4. Oh brother. So an embargo helps you. Great. At the risk of offending you– a writer whose talents, energy and expertise I admire– it’s not all about you. Editorial policies should be designed for the good of the reader, not the publication. If you have to burn the midnight oil not to get burned on a hot story, well, get on with it. And lastly, you are being disigenious. I am not claiming that calling a carmaker for clarification puts you in their pocket. We’re talking here about editorial embargos, which do.
RF,
Fun exchange and a topic that needs more of this type of talk.
I think embargoes should go out the window period yes. That would be my ideal world. If someone gets the spy photos that’s one thing, but all official information and photos should be sent out at the same time to everyone to digest and publish.
Why I don’t do it is because it is more of a news planning aspect more than anything. And I like the time to be accurate. Call folks for clarification, or heaven forbid ask a question of a guy on the show floor.
3. Yes I was kidding.
4. Yes, there should be a practical aspect to them if they exist.
Cars.com takes no trips. we pay our own way. we pay for our own gas (return them on full) for fleet cars etc. I would hazard a guess that besides CR we’re probably the most ardent about that of the big sites.
What amazes me is that people keep confusing “hybrid” with “fuel economy”. The design goal of the hybrid drivetrain is reduced emissions, NOT fuel economy. The latter is merely a benefit, but ONLY IF the hp:weight and CoD ratios work out in the car’s favor at more-than-city-driving speeds.
–chuck
http://chuck.goolsbee.org
RF & DT, thank you for a very entertaining go around. Very interesting to get both of your viewpoints. Over at The Garage, I think we will continue to honor embargos, even if it does mean that we are a day or so later than others with the news.
Now I have a question…Do you all return press fleet vehicles with a full tank? Personally, I just think it’s good manners. That said I’m dreading the cost of filling the Aspen I’m driving next week!
Gary Grant:
Over at The Garage, I think we will continue to honor embargos, even if it does mean that we are a day or so later than others with the news.
One simple question: why?
And no, I don’t refill the tank. But we do mention the gas “donated” at the bottom review. Or at least we did, back when we used to get press cars…
RF – I know this may sound lame and a bit non committal, but it just feels like the right thing to do.
As you know, I have an industry background, not a journalistic background so sometimes I might be missing a little bit of that killer instinct that some of my fellow online journos have. I try to do whatever feels right in any given case.
we return the cars fully fueled yes.
As for embargoes I think more and more will be kept kind of like the vibe and matrix last week. the automakers just won’t let it out.
Robert: perhaps we lost press car access because we’d return them with empty tanks? I was guilty of that too.
Sajeev, I think you may have a point!