Cammy Corrigan had me all a dither yesterday. The TTAC commentator sent an email asserting that “I like TTAC, I really do, but I think it’s starting to lose its way.” God I hope not. Sure, we may have lost a bit of edge here and there. Maintaining our current output AND editorial quality is a daily make that hourly challenge. But it’s kind of hard to “lose your way” when the name of your website is The Truth About Cars. I never have to wonder, hmmm, what should we cover today? And whenever we write about something– from a story about the auto industry to a used car review– there’s never any doubt how to play it. We stick our tongue in our cheek, speak from the heart, call it like we see it and let the chips fall where they may. The Truth About Cars is who we are AND what we do. In addition, I promise you this: we will never take ourselves too seriously or take your concerns lightly. If you’ve got a beef with us, follow Katie’s lead and let us know. Your vigilance and passion makes us stronger, and there is always room for improvement.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
well, what were Katie’s reasons for suggesting this? I’d like to know…
No, you haven’t jumped the shark as far as this reader is concerned.
While there may be some signs of things changing, that appears to be a bottle-nosed dolphin in the photo, so I’m not too concerned about TTAC’s imminent demise.
While you have changed over the past couple of years, I would say they were changes for the better. Keep up the good work.
At this point in time I tend to agree with Ms. Puckrick’s sentiments.
I don’t feel TTAC has softened noticeably. I’d like to know the arguments of the readers who think so.
I certainly enjoy seeing more varied op-eds, more tests, and more news.
And in a sense, seeing less deathwatch articles may be appropriate, considering the (relative) efforts of the domestics to improve their product offerings.
The one thing I’ve missed lately are the international reviews (Fiat, Citroen,…). But I guess it all depends what TTAC’s testers can get their mitts on.
Much of what I see is very predictable, and frankly has become somewhat old. I know GM Ford and especially Chrysler are in deep you know what and deserve a lot of criticism, but I barely scan anything about them. It is as if you are throwing the same chunk of raw meat into the same pit and the same dogs rip it apart with the same comments.
The actual content is barely discussed. Why read this over and over. To me much of TTAC has become predictable and repetitive.
I enjoy the reviews and some of the Editorials but the news part is lacking substance in my opinion.
It’s like Spider Jerusalem said:
“It’s the journalism of attachment. It’s caring about the world you report on. Some people say that’s bad journalism. That there should be a detached, cold, unbiased view of the world in our news media.
And if that’s what you want, there are security cameras everywhere that you could watch tapes of.
I want to see humans talking about human life, personally.
I want to see people who give a shit about the world. I want… I want to see posessed journalists! Yes!
I want to see people like me, rising up with hate-filled eyes and smoking genetalia–posessed by ancient volcano gods from the Polynesian islands, waving vast breasts and improbable penises at the secret masters of the world–naked glowing god-journalists, brown-trousering the naughty twenty-four hours a day, a new planet Earth–
Waiter! Fresh underwear, seven blankets and a bucket of moist towlettes!”
No one agreeing seems to be expressing their path of logic.. So without getting their perspective reasons I can’t agree as I’ve enjoyed and recommended this site to anyone who enjoys cars.
I would also like to know what people mean by the site ‘losing its way’, I’ve been coming here for almost 2 years now and I don’t really see a major change. If anything, the occasional respite from the almost universally-negative tone of most articles on this site is a welcome thing. I look forward to Sajeev’s reviews especially since he seems to have a more positive outlook on life (for lack of a better way to describe it) than the rest of you grumpy old (and young) men (and women)
When Chrysler announced that they were “listening to the customer” and later trumpeted their new religion was “focus groups,” this website had a heyday.
Who, in their right mind, A) Believes Chrysler, B) Believes their own customers?
Sniggering and pointing at Chrysler management and marketing ensued.
How would Joe Carbuyer know anything about the complex nature of car design, building and marketing? The trillions of variables and decisions that must be made? What does Joe really know? Buck up, Chrysler, said TTAC. Make some tough decisions from your own gut. You’re the experts. Now start acting like it and get going.
Yet over the course of the past several days, we have TTAC wondering aloud to its own customers (readers) — and asking them what THEY’D do:
Are we a strong brand?
Would it be stronger if we split up our website?
Or redisigned it?
Would it help us make more money?
And even, have we lost our “Heyyyy…!” (as in Fonzerelli, Arthur)?
Now there’s listening to your customers. And then, there’s having spasms of anxiety and self-doubt in public.
And there’s criticising Chrysler on one hand, yet doing the same thing yourself on the other.
No doubt, I’ll concede the most readers of this site know way more about web design, marketing, and branding than your average bear. In fact, a TTAC regular knows exponentially more about these subjects than the average car buyer knows about designing and making cars.
But my point is: TTAC management has to ask the hard questions — and answer them — in private first. Soliciting public debate of company policy, management, marketing, and especially relevancy is not good form.
But then again, Robert may just be attempting to stir the s***, in which case, we’ve obliged by rushing to get our own spoons.
Don’t listen to mediocracy, because that will dumb down the content. Essentially, your are right where you should be, and the rest is fine tuning, like meta-discussions like this. But when you listen to people, there’s a difference between hearing them out and doing what they say. Just because you listen doesn’t mean you have do what they say every single time. The way do it is picking up the best and the brightest ideas and then go “The right way” wherever that will lead you. The important thing isn’t who says what, or who’s idea was the best, but with the goal in mind figuring out what the best way to go is to reach the goal. People want to be listened to, people want to be taken seriously. And as long as you do that, that is more important than actually following the advices they give.
C’mon now. You guys (TTAC staff) shouldn’t be second-guessing yourselves, just because of some vague opinions made by site visitors.
This site is called ‘The Truth About Cars’, and as far as I can see, that’s what goes on here.
Don’t worry about pleasing everybody. That’s not part of a journalist’s job.
Anyway, I have three words for you regarding this particular article/incident, Mr. Farago: Consider the source.
I come frome the film-making business, i have worked as a director. As all creative and artistic work, none of your original ideas end up in the finished product without something having changed. And what happens is reality clashing with artistic vision, and for a vision to be realized, the reality will have to win or you will not have a product. The idea has to be put on paper, film, the internet, or in the auto business, as a selling product.
Staying true to course as much as possible means that the integrity of the idea is maintained. Those who wanders off will end up in mediocracy. And all along the way, there will be constant compromises. There’s a fine line to walk, but those who make it, do that because ultimately, the believe in what they do, and are willing to fight for their ideas.
TTAC as an idea is a vision, and a beautiful one. It is not difficult to understand or comprehend. It is simple, and it is true. It is an easy vision to fight for, and therfore, shouldn’t be that difficult to uphold. As I, and many others, share that vision, I am comfortable in the thought that whatever the staff on this site will do, or whatever the ideas will look like, or in wahtever form, the vision will last until the final truths have been told and mediocracy in the auto-business have been swept away forever.
My biggest problem with TTAC is two-fold.
#1, you beg and plead with the domestics to develop product that is competitive or better. To reduce their dealer network. To improve their cost structure. When the domestics do things that fit your “vision,” they are lampooned mercilessly.
#2, the piling on of most of the Commentators is comical. I feel like I am in Junior High around here, 75% of the responses either contain some type of vulgarity, or seem to drip with glee in hopes that an American automaker will crash and burn.
Alex Rodriguez
“75% of the responses either contain some type of vulgarity”
I’m shocked by this
Guys, try and bump it to 80% by week’s end.
Hmm, well in my opinion the quality of your work is about the same now as always ;)
Anyway you certainly continue use the word farrago more than any other media outfit.
I have to give TTAC kudos for not becoming extremely overwhelmed by the load of information being passed through your hands daily. I would also like to add that used car reviews are in fact, gold. Keep up the good work, and don’t forget the mundane cars of our past. Perhaps the rose colored glasses of time will be gentler to them.
I want to add to what Alex said. We are very aware of the weaknesses (and weak product) that the domestics have. But the “pile on” doesn’t help. One of the low points for me was the review of the Pontiac Grand Prix, a car that is on it’s way out of production and does not reflect the way that GM is going or at all indiciative of it’s more recent products. It seemed to me like you were picking on the neighborhood retarded kid for the pure joy of it.
A second sore spot is the cynical nature of the news blog. While some cynicism is good (especially towards government and politicians), constant cynicism towards what various automakers are doing with their product is getting tiresome. Even Toyota gets some of this cynical treatment, but it’s mostly directed at the domestics. How about just reporting the news item and let the audience make comments whether cycnical or not?
Jonny,
Does this site want to be “The Truth about Cars” or “Dice goes to Detroit?” I mean, if TTAC wants to go emulate the esteemed Mr. Dice, then I will know where to go to get the latest put-downs and one-liners on today’s autos.
But that will mean that if I want the real skinny on the Auto Industry, I will look elsewhere.
I like TTAC, I hope they go with Option A.
windswords :
Last things first…
A second sore spot is the cynical nature of the news blog. While some cynicism is good (especially towards government and politicians), constant cynicism towards what various automakers are doing with their product is getting tiresome. Even Toyota gets some of this cynical treatment, but it’s mostly directed at the domestics. How about just reporting the news item and let the audience make comments whether cycnical or not?
The writers for this site strive to tell the truth. They attempt to separate what they’re told and what they perceive to be “real.” There’s no question: the resulting cynicism informs much of their thinking. But as Ben Franklin correctly surmised, it’s better to be a cynic and pleasantly surprised than an optimist and constantly disappointed. And thanks for recognizing that we are, as a group, equal opportunity cynics.
Next…
I want to add to what Alex said. We are very aware of the weaknesses (and weak product) that the domestics have. But the “pile on” doesn’t help. One of the low points for me was the review of the Pontiac Grand Prix, a car that is on it’s way out of production and does not reflect the way that GM is going or at all indiciative of it’s more recent products. It seemed to me like you were picking on the neighborhood retarded kid for the pure joy of it.
I consider it a misfortune that the “pile on” isn’t helping. The Grand Prix may be going to that great junkyard in the sky, but it hasn’t gone yet. Not only is it fair to warn potential buyers that it blows, but it helps GM to remind them that they should never build that kind of car again. Or, maybe, fix it. Or if not the Grand Prix, then the Cobalt. Or the Aveo. Or…
Can you see what I’m trying to do here? TTAC’s job is to tell the truth about cars. This is no bad thing. If we seem overly-harsh, it’s because we’re strong medicine. If not us, who?
Domestic Hearse:
You seem to think that A) TTAC is a monolithic enterprise with a single perspective and B) “we” don’t believe in, for the lack of a better term, navel gazing. Neither of these assertions is correct.
No one save flamers (of the site, its authors or fellow commentators) is discouraged from posting here. If you disagree with anything on this site, you are free to post a reply or write an editorial.
The reason we don’t believe Chrysler’s market research is because of its cars. By thy deeds they shall be known. And there is nothing more cynical than soliciting advise and then intentionally, willfully and arrogantly ignoring it.
I like the style of the older reviews a bit more, because they tend to be a bit more entertaining and witty and if a bit superfluous. I stumbled on this site after reading a really hilarious design study on the new S-Class and became a daily visitor of your site since! Sure, that “review” wouldn’t be useful for a potential shopper, but it was a blast to read (I sometimes find myself re-reading reviews). It’s the raison d’etre for TTAC for me! That and the eloquent and relevant editorials (I think Ford Death Watch 4 had a very memorable conclusion that stang FoMoCo like a beyotch), and especially the Between the Lines series and the comments sections. I think TTAC is still doing a pretty good job, but some of the recent reviews can be more Edmunds-ish. And some of the news items are very objective and boring or blah, like how a 17 y.o. drove drunk and his mom caught him or how BMW has a new 8-speed automatic. TTAC is too good to waste its efforts on simple factoidal/observational news stories (that’s what Autoblog is for). What we want are deep, insightful analysis on stuff! Especially since it provokes discussion and discussions on here are amazingly nice!
So many thoughts, so little time…
I think TTAC is suffering from a phenomenon that is pretty much common to any narrowly focused website: eventually everything gets repeated enough that some readers are turned off. Web forums are a great example. I have participated in numerous web forums over the years, some very actively, yet without exception I have lost interest in all of them. The discussions remain the same, only the names have changed. (This is why I think a forum at TTAC is a bad move.)
The comments section at TTAC behaves much like a web forum, save for the fact that only the site’s masters can start the threads. You see the same arguments repeated ad infinitum. Every reader has a threshold above which time spent at any one site delivers rapidly diminishing returns. Frankly, I’ve passed mine, and find myself coming to TTAC less often as a result. I still enjoy it, but I am more selective on which news items I read. While before I would strive not to miss news items, I no longer care if I miss a couple days worth. In that sense, TTAC has jumped my shark.
This is the danger TTAC runs. When regular readers come to the site already knowing what they are going to read, the only ones that stick around are the very opinionated types that enjoy re-hashing the same arguments over, and over, and over… On a web forum this usually results in a poor signal-to-noise ration and an ensuing death spiral that sees a constant turn over of posters.
Another issue for TTAC: until you gain some journalistic credibility with the auto industry you are really just an opinion site (not that there is anything wrong with that, but opinions are a dime a dozen). Unfortunately, the industry doesn’t take kindly to “no holds barred” coverage, so that credibility will be hard to come by. I look forward to the day when TTAC can report its own news, rather than just blogging other sources.
Some suggestions:
– Reduce news coverage. Limit to, say, 5-6 important items per day. Try to find items with a unique angle. If an item is similar to one recently blogged, ignore it. Same sh*t different day gets boring.
– From the “easier said than done” file: more reviews. This is where TTAC can truly deliver value to the reader and generate original content that can better engage readers in fresh dialogue.
– Allow reviews to go up to 2 pages. Make more of a review than a “driving impression” as R&T calls them.
– Consider disabling comments on some items. It doesn’t take a genius to suss out which items are likely to generate the same old discussion.
– Add some technical articles (I’m looking at mech eng. Sajeev here). [How about an article about what happened to the CVT? Ten years ago I was reading articles about the promise of CVTs and how they would revolutionize transmissions. Today we have a handful of them, nobody likes them, and the Taurus (nee Five Hundred) has dropped it in favour of a slushbox. What got between promise and reality?]
I could probably write more, but I gotta get back to work!
Kudos to Dean. I couldn’t agree with him more.
Dean—Kudos and Kudos.
Your comment “You see the same arguments repeated ad infinitum” could not ring truer.
I have recently come to the same conclusion and will be only be posting comments that add something new —very hard to do given my passion on certain topics…but the right thing to do for me and this site….who the hell wants to hear me blather about the same thing over and over.
Robert—-My suggestion would be to bag the Deathwatch series—-I really do not think it serves any real purpose now. It was a great idea that has gotten played out by the same old arguements, comments, and cynicism. The absolute number of comments has decreased—-but more importantly the quality of comments has decreased over the past few months. Net, the series has become rather banal….
I agree with Dean in that I’d like to see more reviews (and longer than 800 words), but I’m quite fine with the recent spate of more frequent content.
But in NO way do I believe TTAC has “jumped the shark”, although I respect Ms. Pucrik’s frequent and often witty contributions.
#2, the piling on of most of the Commentators is comical. I feel like I am in Junior High around here, 75% of the responses either contain some type of vulgarity, or seem to drip with glee in hopes that an American automaker will crash and burn.
Alex,
I couldn’t disagree with you more. One of the chief reasons I am a regular to this site is because of the respectful nature of the commentators. It seems to me that most of us are not gleeful whatsoever at Detroit’s demise. I personally want to see the D3 succeed and come out of this mess as world-class automakers, though I doubt that will happen. While there is some vulgarity, it by no means dominates the content. Most other automotive web sites and forums are filled of unchecked insults and derision of writers and other commentators. Never in TTAC do you hear:
“If U like Ford, than your a stupid retard”
Several times, other commentators have disagreed with my points, and I have had no personal beef with them because of that. Several times I have been corrected for misstating a fact or figure, but never with any malice or ill-willed insults.
Far from the junior high attitude, I equate The Truth About Cars to an educated group of adults having a round of drinks together. There are disagreements, a bit of cynicism and the occasional off-colored laugh, but for the most part, it is a respectful exchange of ideas. If you have any doubt of this, simply re-read the posts above.
“Another issue for TTAC: until you gain some journalistic credibility with the auto industry you are really just an opinion site (not that there is anything wrong with that, but opinions are a dime a dozen). Unfortunately, the industry doesn’t take kindly to “no holds barred” coverage, so that credibility will be hard to come by.”
You see that as a problem, I see that as an advantage. Mainstream media is just that, mainstream. And they are mainstream for a reason, that they write what the industry wants them to do. Think of them as embedded journalists, embedded in pr-spin. Covering a war on your own is expensive, dangerous and definitively no holds barred. But that is the only way to go, to cut trough all industry bullshit to cover the truth.
TTAC as an idea will never be accepted by the industry. And that’s good. Because when it is, it means that TTAC has lost its edge. Journalistic credibility is not judged by the industry or media, but by the readers. At the end of the day, what is credible is at the hands of the viewing public. And being the one voice for reason in a sea of mediocracy, TTAC are to my knowledge, the only watershed I have seen on the issue. And as Mr Farago said:
“This is no bad thing. If we seem overly-harsh, it’s because we’re strong medicine. If not us, who?”
So, tell me: Is there any other place were issues like this can be seen? Show me, because I wanna know, so I can go there and read it. To my mind, journalistic credibility and integrity can be clarified in the common credo: “Publish, or be damned.”
TTAC publishes, and damn those who don’t…
TTAC is fine with me.
If I were to nitpick…
More reviews would be better.
Some daze, the quantity of ‘news’ posts is a smidgel much. Perhaps news posts could be filtered/categorized?
But don’t ask me how, I’m just a lame critic…
dean
Great post. I’ll take it to heart. I’m as guilty as anyone of re-hashing things and being repetitive. I’ll try to stay out of the rut.
What I like most about TTAC is the editorials and the comments (comments on everything, not just editorials). It’s the insight and intelligence of the other posters that keeps me coming back – even if I happen to disagree with someone.
I like the discussions of the industry. Most auto related web sites are about individual cars or about being a fanboy for a particular make. Where else could there be a lengthy discussion of automobile branding?
That said, it wouldn’t hurt to supplement the death watch series with more positive articles about what the industry players are doing right.
I’m largely indifferent to the news section. I’ll comment on some items, but often I just skip right over them. As others have suggested, fewer news items of greater interest would be a good move.
Reviews for me are a mixed bag. I like the reviews I’ve read, but I won’t usually read about any car that I’d never buy, (or never be ableto buy).
Hey TTAC,
I’ve been here since GM Death Watch #1. And which is the first website I hit everyday? Yep, TTAC. Period.
Actually, I find the commentary here very civilized. Occasionally they go off on a tangent which could be reeled in. But compared to almost every other site I’ve been to, it’s way better.
Maybe a few fewer death watch series. We know those guys are screwed…
I love the idea of the ‘vintage’ road tests although I appreciate they might not be easy to pull off.
Do you get many submissions from readers?
On most news stories, you know what is going to be said without even opening it – especially if it is about an American automobile company, and to a lesser extent, Toyota.
I continue to read the site only because there are a few interesting news stories, but the editorial content is always pretty much the same – relentless cynicism masked as insightful comment.
True. Seems someone writes an article highlighting GM’s or Bob Lutz ineptitude and all the usual suspects just pile on. Over and over and over.
I like the relentless cynicism. It’s a refreshing change from the relentless fellating of the automakers that you see on every single other site/magazine except for Consumer Reports.
“That and the eloquent and relevant editorials (I think Ford Death Watch 4 had a very memorable conclusion that stang FoMoCo like a beyotch)”
Where is FDW #4? It’s missing from the archive.
Seems someone writes an article highlighting GM’s or Bob Lutz ineptitude and all the usual suspects just pile on.
Well, then GM and Bob Lutz need to stop displaying their ignorance, and the articles would stop. Job done.
I’ve been lurking here a longtime, but I had to jump in on this one….
I see no sharks being jumped around here (you’ve wisely left that to the Fonz…)
Considering the passions stimulated on both sides pro- and anti-domestic, I think you do a fine job of letting everyone vent their side, but keeping a good signal-to-noise ratio. I often only read articles to savour the comments they provoke.
And I think you continue to do a great job on both the news and gossip side (which seem to be the bread and butter of maintaining freshness).
I wish that TTAC would add a FAQS to explain some of the background for some of the articles. There are many assumptions about what the visitor knows.
For example, no one has really explained why a car company can’t drop a dealer. Yet it is accepted as gospel.
To people not in the industry, a little learnin’ will go a long ways.
Am I the only one who really enjoys the one star reviews? And the death watch series?
Nah. Just look what happens when a car wreck happens on the highway. Everyone slows down to ‘rubberneck.’
A one star review is the journalistic equivalent. I wouldn’t buy one of these cars. But I can’t look away from the carnage…
I enjoy them too, Rix. I would actually like to see more negativity in the reviews.
I don’t read the Death Watch items. Why not transfer the energy from them into something more engaging?
No, keep the Death Watches. They are a hallmark of TTAC and, personally, what I look forward to most. No one else (that I’m aware of) has the balls to put this stuff online. Hey, this is the stuff companies pay consultants to tell them!
To the people who don’t like DW’s and would like to see their demise: don’t read them. Simple. It would be interesting to go back to the various DW’s and see the number of times the DW naysayers have commented on them.
To be a fan of TTAC, I think you need to have an open mind, have a strong constitution, be able to show restraint and civility when commenting, and, if you’re a fan of a particular make, not take criticism of that make personally.
First off, I found out about TTAC through another automotive blog, actually it was the motor trend blog. Some one was badmouthing TTAC over there so I had to see what all the fuss was about. I haven’t been back to motor trend since.
At motor trend every single discussion can be summed up in two lines:
“yer a retard for buying domestic”
“yer a terrorist and hate yer country if you don’t buy domestic”
No matter the topic it always boils down to those two points.
The no flaming policy was what got me to this site. But the comical, cynical reviews/editorials/news is what kept me here.
So I say, keep up the good work.
If you read the Motor Trend blog, the terrorists win.
Take a deep cleansing breath and get back to work.