Source Interlink Media owns Motor Trend magazine. Both conglomerate and car mag are heading south, quickly, in a big way. Ad revenues and circulation are in free fall. Motor Trend (MT) is fighting for it survival with glossy pimpatorials for equally doomed advertisers. The August issue features a glossy "special advertising section" for Buick ("Drive Beautiful") and a slick "advertisement" for the Dodge Challenger ("Motor Trend drives the new Dodge Challenger Through Europe"). Meanwhile, the chronically undercapitalized columnist arthur st. antoine takes a whack at a premium car brand: BMW. Huh?
Start with this: BMW doesn’t advertise in Motor Trend. GMC, Extenze (male enhancement pills), Mercedes-Benz, The Sinclair Institute (“Better Sex for a Lifetime”), MINI, Xomax (male enhancement pills), Infiniti, MAGNA-RX Inc. (male enhancement pills)– but no BMW. You could say with all those pills readers need not buy a BMW– but I couldn’t possibly comment.
Anyway, no feeding hand is bitten, bitte. If MT’s Editor at Large had taken a shot at the Chevrolet Aveo on the mag’s back cover– now with extra hideousness (courtesy of an Audi meets Malibu snout)– I would have been impressed. But he didn’t so I’m not.
“We car journalists are suckers for BMWs. Every model the Bavarian Brand produces is an engineering masterwork, manna for driving enthusiasts, an internal combustion mallet for pummeling comparison-test rivals into humiliated awe. Why even bother to conduct such tests? We’ll choose the machine with the blue-and-white propeller every time. Right?”
Clued-in parsoholics will realize that “Right?” signals st. antoine’s sarcasm. Clued-in pistonheads will realize antoine’s defense comes hot-on-the-heels of Car and Driver’s July comparo, where the mag rated a BMW M3 higher than a Porsche Turbo and Nissan GT-R. Though st. antoine is a former Car and Driver writer, doesn’t he have anything better to do than defend his erstwhile rivals? Apparently not.
“That’s the cliché… But the reality is this: BMW’s supremacy is a myth, one based in part on some historical validity but sustained in recent years largely by a single model, the 3 Series (okay, the new 1 Series seems strong, too). As for the rest of the lineup… where are the superstars? M5 sedan? A thrilling drive, yes, but in its most recent comparo (February 2007) a second-place finisher to the sweeter, sleeker Audi S6.”
Is it me or is st. antoine trying to gum BMW to death? The new BMW M5 blows compared to any car in the entire world that doesn’t have an SMG gearbox. The latterly six-speed manual M5 is OK, and plenty damn quick by any metric, but the Bimmer is a bling-bang-boom travesty when contrasted with its legendary predecessor.
There, that wasn’t so hard was it? And either the 1 Series is strong or it isn’t. It “seems” like a good time for st. antoine to get off the fence. Of course, attacking BMW isn’t really the point of this dietribe [sic]. It’s all about defending MT’s “objectivity” and “integrity” (har-har). Hence st. antoine presents a list of MT comparos Bimmers DIDN’T win within its increasingly tissue-like pages.
And now, a bit of dead horse beating…
“…the iDrive controller remains a poster child of frustration and feature-glut (do you really need a an electronic menu to adjust the airflow from individual vents?), we simply can’t heartily endorse a car– no matter how surgical its steering or smooth its inline six– blemished by that glaring chrome iDrive mole.”
Wow! That’s a LOT of punctuation. But little punch. Critizing BMW for iDrive is like slagging an Escalade for lousy mileage; it’s safe, well-trodden ground. Oh, and in this case, st. antoine's claim of withholding his love for the propeller people's products simply isn't true. st. antoine on the 135i:
“I'm blown away by this little stealth fighter. I can't recall another car that's been more surprising to drive; I expected the 135i to offer solid performance, but it's breathtakingly quick. Refined, too- it's a bona-fide BMW."
Sounds solid to me. Uh, where was I? More importantly, where was st. antoine? Ah, giving the BMW X6 what the Brits call a proper pasting.
“…the X6 is also grotesquely heavy, too small to carry anything, compromised in the back by that free-falling roofline, saddled with iDrive and a needlessly complicated shift lever, and absurdly expensive.”
Finally! st. antoine substantiates his contention that BMW ain’t so big (it’s just tall, that’s all). The paragraph is also a compelling argument that his employer isn't in BMW's pocket. So, a quick twist of the knife and out. Right?
“That BMW’s engineers are gifted goes without saying. As German-born architect Mies van der Rohe once said, though, “Less is more.” Also, “What is this big chrome mole here?”
You gotta admire a writer who can so deftly blend ass-kissing, name-dropping and a non sequitur. Still, at the end of page 24, st. antoine’s quasi-rant provides proof– if proof be needed– that MT is doomed.
Motor Trend has resorted to offering me a free subscription. Is this happening to anyone else?
Motor Trend has resorted to offering me a free subscription. Is this happening to anyone else?
Still overpriced.
That magazine hasn’t shown an ounce of credibility in the past three decades, why start now?
Did I miss the point? Hasn’t TTAC taken BMW to task on many of these same issues? RF, sorry but I have to agree with MT on several points; I-Drive is so bad it stops people from buying an otherwise nice automobile. I also agree with his X6 comments, and it is not hard to argue that BMW is banking on it’s 1980’s and 1990’s reputation.
readingthetape : Motor Trend has resorted to offering me a free subscription. Is this happening to anyone else?
Wow, I knew car rag subscriptions were dirt cheap on eBay but not free. New low.
1981.911.SC
Did I miss the point?
Yes, I think you did. The point is that Motor Trend’s journalistic standards are rubbish. At best, st. antoine sugar-coated his “criticism.” At worst, he knew he chose a safe target– and STILL sugar-coated it.
As I said, let’s see a negative review of one of their advertiser’s products. Providing, of course, they deserve it.
haven’t read a MT since i was in the 6th grade circa 1974.
Perhaps st antione needs to “test drive” Extenze, The Sinclair Institute and Xomax then report back to everyone. Or perhaps he’d be too tired/exhausted/expelled to write.
You could say with all those pills readers need not buy a BMW–
Priceless, Mr. Farago!
A lot of magazines are doing free trial subscriptions now. Some mags are even doing subscriptions entirely free of strings (notably the extremely high-quality, but extremely niche, pro audio engineer magazine Tape Op).
Can it also be the fault, in part, of the auto manufacturers that impose favored pre-market test drives to favoured publications that favour them? That’s been discussed here often enough, but it definitely feeds on itself. A magazine (esp. post internet) needs the first reviews badly to get any hope of a sale, and only the magazines that willingly bend over will get it (wakk-wakka-wakka).
Funny, as I wrote MT a letter several months ago that after reading all of their articles about hybrids and how they now list a vehicle’s CO2 (like we all care), that I can see why they end MT with ads for male enhancement pills. LOL
I haven’t renewed my subscription, btw.
Dont forget Dr Winnifred Cutler and her athena 10x pheromone after shave additive.Her pic would indicate she knows nothing about dating. How many years has her ad littered the back page ads of the buff books?
There was a MT-sponsored auto show in Utah back in January. With the price of admission ($6 or so) everybody got a free 1-year subscription to MT, “courtesy of the Utah Auto Dealers Association.” It seemed like a good deal, so I took the bait. After receiving the magazine for 5 months now, I think they should be paying me for adding to their subscription numbers. Seriously, it isn’t even worth getting if it’s free.
Great editorial, RF. And thanks for saving me from having to open the MT to read st. antoine’s column.
Motor Trend is by far the worst of the US car magazines, but is there really a good one? The only one I subscribe to is Sports Car International. I almost picked up an Automobile issue the other day but I knew it would probably be a waste of money and time. R&T and C&D siblings aren’t much better either…Sad really.
Meh, on both accounts. My daughter’s BF left me a couple of the latest issues of MT, not impressed.
As the owner of a pair of ’88 528es and an old bimmerphile in general, Double Meh on the current crop of Bimmers. If ever there was an outfit resting on its laurels, it is BMW
Sorry it took a while to respond. I was caught up in the ProActiv and Honda ads on the homepage.
I don’t like, read or subscribe to MT. If you don’t like it, don’t read it. Move on. This dancing over the dying beast stuff is getting very old.
Is it me or is st. antoine trying to gum BMW to death?
It’s you. I found the carefully selected excerpts to be more balanced than what is given credit.
Should he have said that every BMW sucks wind and they should just shut their doors while they’re ahead? Should he have just come out and said that every automotive print journalist is in the pocket of manufacturers? I didn’t include online journalists because I know they are completely unbiased.
I thought the sarcasm is probably directed more at the people that always scream that car magazines are owned by BMW, or whatever other automotive punching bag seems popular at that time.
Critizing BMW for iDrive is like slagging an Escalade for lousy mileage; it’s safe, well-trodden ground.
The “slagging an Escalade for lousy mileage” could be replaced with “slagging MT (C/D, R&T, and Automobile) for having an opinion we don’t agree with.” It’s also safe, well trodden ground.
What if he actually believed what he said?!?!?! Wow, there’s an idea!! Someone actually likes something despite it’s flaws or doesn’t like something because of them! Did you read anywhere that he would give up his first born for a BMW, or that he would rather jump off a cliff rather than drive another BMW? I didn’t. He didn’t say he loved everything they make, and didn’t say he hated everything they make.
I guess I don’t really understand the point of this editorial.
I am surprised that so many group MT and C&D together. C&D has its problems but if you read both magazines, MT is not in the same league. C&D is much better written, its editorials can be insightful, and there is still some humor. MT serves as desperate bathroom reading for me.
As German-born architect Mies van der Rohe once said, though, “Less is more.”
Very true. Mies designed an Esso gas station in Montreal. Man, that toilet is small but it’s enough to get the job done.
All I can tell you is that the very worst auto-related columns I’ve ever read have been authored by St. Antoine. It utterly boggles my mind that this guy can make a living writing about automobiles. He usually has very little to say, and presumably therefore, he’ll usually dump in as many cliches as needed to fill his monthly space.
I don’t really need to read this latest piece of bull from the guy — knowing its origin, I can presume it’s another piece of rubbish, and I’ll go find something better to do with my time.
The “new” MT, CD and R&T is Edmunds.com. I haven’t bought a buff book in maybe a year or two. Why should I? All the info is available online, and there is no added value those magazines bring.
Isn’t that the issue?
Oh, and one other thing… this is the site I go to when I want the real poop. If I want fancy descriptors, I’ll go to edmunds. If I want real world and wit with my review, and get stories to back up or tear down a review, I come here.
TTAC is unique.
If it wasn’t for the fact I need something to read in the crapper I wouldn’t bother with any of the auto rags.
The quality of tests (tests?) and editorials in the popular auto publications have constantly deteriorated over the years. The endless on-going and stupendously boring articles on this exotic Italian vehicle or that overpriced German metal is an affront to their readers intelligence.
I can remember when I was a kid in the mid 50’s eagerly looking forward to the latest issue of M.T for the straight scoop on the domestic models. Model changeover time was the best.
These folks should wake up and smell the coffee. The automotive world is changing forever and these publishers need to get in tune with these changes and drop the emphasis on horsepower and top speed. They should concentrating more on what ought be more important to their readers such as fuel mileage and durability.
I get a lot more info from TTAC not only on what’s going on in the automotive world but a real sense of the mood of the American people today.
i keep getting issues of Automobile and MotorTrend and i havent paid for either for 2 years….
Dropped MT subscription 10 years ago, so much commercialist fluff and ass kissing reviews.
Car mags, and automotive journalists in genral wear me down. The all usually write about pricey vehicles I could only fantasize about. It is understandable. If I got to test cars for free/for a living, hell yes all I’d want test & write up would be the best & most expensive vehicles. These guys seem to foget a majority of us out here are not borderline millionares. I want to learn about vehicles I have half a chance of owning.
Consumer’s mag, and C&D are the only ones I’ll even glance at any more.
I’ve been reading car mags since the mid ’60s. They were far more incisive and opinionated when they weren’t owned by mega corporations.
If you want fluff, go watch Motorweek.
I don’t find the “Big 3” magazines all that fluffy. Yes, they test exotic cars because that is what many of their readers want to read and it helps grab attention on the newstand. But they also test everyday cars that most of us can buy and drive.
I read both C/D and Automobile. I’ll pick up Top Gear if I have some extra money ($10-11 depending on exchange rates). But basically, all the publications reach more or less the same consensus on vehicles, even TTAC. The difference is the writer’s/editor’s opinion and the writing style. And that is what all reviews are, opinions. If you agree with the writer’s point of view, you will think it’s the “straight poop,” if you don’t it’s the bathroom reading material.
georgie :
If it wasn’t for the fact I need something to read in the crapper I wouldn’t bother with any of the auto rags.
Hee hee! Yep, with all of the information available on the ‘net, the only reason I have car magazines in the house is “for the reading room.”
And, yes, the thing that utterly galls me is how 95% of the content is about vehicles that only 5% of the readership could possibly afford.
I’ll add one more. Auto journalists give convertibles far more attention than their actual share of the car market.
I’ve never really thought about it, but I used to love getting my 4-5 car mags a month. Read them front to back (usually on the can) the day they arrived.
Now, I really don’t care too much. They sit on my table for days or weeks sometimes. The only one I find myself still reading and enjoying is Automobile. All the other ones are so boring (car X goes 0-60 in Y seconds while car Z does it in Y+0.05 seconds….car X is way better).
I think the biggest thing is that by the time the mags show up I’ve already read 3 articles on the internet 4 weeks earlier. And the net articles are more fun to read and more honest. Think the only thing I like about Automobile is how they combine cars with trips. Good writing not just about the cars but about the countryside they’re driving through. More to it than just stats.
“…but I couldn’t possibly comment.”
A fan of The House of Cards trilogy, are we? IMHO, one of the best things I’ve ever seen on television. Ian Richardson will be missed.
AutoFan :
….
I guess I don’t really understand the point of this editorial.
Just as Robert said. We have yet to see an MT editorial taking an MT advertiser to task.
Just as Robert said. We have yet to see an MT editorial taking an MT advertiser to task.
It was pointed out that BMW isn’t an advertiser in MT.
Since so many people on here claim to not read MT or just read it on the crapper, why does it matter that an editor of a magazine you don’t read doesn’t agree with your opinion?
Again, the short excerpts given seemed well-reasoned. Why is so hard to believe that he actually believes what he wrote? He didn’t have anything to lose by writing the article. He MAY have gained BMW as an advertiser, but not likely as I’m sure demographic research is done as to where they will advertise. Maybe try asking St. Antoine about his “soft shoeing” in a letter to the editor rather than on a message board he most likely won’t read.
readingthetape: Motor Trend has resorted to offering me a free subscription. Is this happening to anyone else?
YES!! A few years ago I started magically recieving MT for free. All my friends/family said they didn’t do it. Stopped getting it about a year ago…needless to say I’m not too disappointed, but still…WIERD.
thoots: If it wasn’t for the fact I need something to read in the crapper I wouldn’t bother with any of the auto rags.
Wi-Fi plus your favorite laptop or handheld computer (say like my Linux powered Nokia N810)….
Car reviews are no longer that important to me. I’d rather hear from folks that already own a car via forums. How many times has it broken? How did the dealer do when you needed the warranty? How has the MPG stacked up against the window sticker? Does it meet your expectations?
Can’t count how many times I have driven a non-mainstream vehicle that was good or really good but gets no love in the magazines. I have driven a Eurovan many times and the one review that I recall questioned why anyone would even want to sleep in a van in the first place and the review was downhill from there.
Reviews sometimes read like a Corvette enthusiast commenting on a Datsun pickup or a Mack truck driver commenting on a VW Beetle Cabrio. Sometimes the guy writing the article just doesn’t get it. I am very suspicious of anyone that declares ANYTHING to be a real piece of junk these days. What I find most often is someone who has different expectations that are sometimes unrealistic or someone who has different needs whether they know it or not.
That’s why I go to the forums. Even there a reader has to take what they read with a big spoonful of salt. First off most of the comments are from people with broken cars seeking help. Tough to know who dogs their vehicle to death and then bitches about it. Tough to know who duct-tapes their car together and expresses surprise when it won’t last.
I have long had the same problem with domestic cars. Are they really crap since most of my friends and family have them and they have a lot of trouble from them or are they okay but their owners treat them like crap???
I tend to lean towards crappy owners b/c I own a “crap car” (late 90s VW) and its okay. Not going to say its as good as my Honda but its okay.
Lastly reviewers tend to mention “problems” that isn’t really a problem. The I-drive might appeal to some folks but once you get everything adjusted just so, how often are you going to need to adjust stuff in the “lower menus”? Sort of like owning a computer – once you get all the desktop settings, colors, and sounds right – how often do you change that stuff? Maybe BMW is trying hard to appeal to folks who want all these little settings a certain way. I know the VW/AUDI products have a bunch of settings accessible from a VAG device. Interior light delays, throttle adjustments, – all sorts of stuff the average person might not give a thought to.
Okay so the X6 has a weird roofline. You ought to know at first glance this will limit what fits in the back. If they put the standard boxy greenhouse on it, the X6 would no longer be distinctive and it would lose some of it’s charm and the reviewers would likely roast BMW for releasing just another boxy SUV variant. GOOD for BMW for releasing something “new” even if it gives up some functionality.
I think this is a good example of the fickle consumer market. We demand something different and when it gets here there is often an uproar that it doesn’t meet somebody’s expectations. GM builds a bunch of nice RWD Pontiacs to answer the general opinion that there are far too many FWD sedans and coupes. They arrive and they aren’t welcome. Too much of the wrong things when in fact they are pretty good for their price and yes, they do have certain characteristics that make them less desirable under certain road or weather conditions like snow, rain and rough pavement.
I guess I’m saying there is too much commentary declaring things to be “rotten sh*t” when there ought to be more acceptance that this particular product might not be for everyone but it’s a good product for these reasons. Folks working too hard to tell the world what is wrong with a product and not enough discussion about what is right about the product.
Yeah, I know – it is prob just the market’s response to the overly positive and chokingly sugary sweet marketing materials that most companies introduce their products with.
I think the problem goes far beyond auto magazines. All sorts of periodicals have gone downhill. A mountain biking magazine I used to subscribe to is now almost all pictures; there is less writing than you would find in a comic book, and the writing there is is of less quality than a comic book. Cycling magazines: Junk. Running magazines: Junk. Outside magazine is now looks like a rag for gay yuppies–not that there is anything wrong with that.
We are in the process of becoming a non-reading society, and to maintain readership the quality has to be pushed downward to appeal to a steadily declining lowest common denominator.
I read an article the other day on Edmunds. It was like an Evo vs. R8 vs. STi vs. 911 and some others. The Evo had like the slowest slalom performance and one of the slower 0-60 times. Still on the back roads and on the race track it was among the faster cars. Just goes to show how little the usual numbers mattered.
I wanna hear about how understeer is induced and how and why. How a car transitions through corners. How it feels everyday. Perhaps its best if I learn to evaluate things myself better, and communicate my views/feelings/believes/perspectives…..I think I’ll work on a Review of my car. I think we out to post our personal reviews of vehicles. In a profile section or something.
Qwerty, I agree that all mags have much less text that they used to. I can blow through one in one short sitting, in most cases. I think the problem is that we as a country don’t read enough and that effects the quality of writing. Advise I got once was: “to write better, read more”. All print pieces seem to be in trouble these days and they seem to be clueless about what to do, not that I have any answers either.
The traditional “buff book” model is based on advertising from primarily auto-based sources – and, apparently, sex pills. They also rely heavily on “freebies” from manufacturers. The result of both is an inability to deliver bad news about a product that deserves it because to do so would be biting the hand that feeds them.
Now in the days of “Teh InterTubes”, automotive news is broken not by the buff books three months after the fact, but by dedicated web sites as it happens. With their status as the source for the latest dirt gone, the buff books need a new model.
The presence of this website and the success of the BBC’s Top Gear and Consumer Reports (yeah, yeah, they have their problems, too, but stay with me here) would seem to indicate that there is a market for TV/internet/print media that deals in “just the facts ma’am” automotive commentary and reviews.
The reviews don’t need to be especially timely – some reviews on this very site come out months after the vehicle does. And that’s fine. The reviews and commentary need to be thoughtful, insightful, well-written, and above all, honest. Don’t just tell me the Chevy Aveo sucks, tell me why you think so. I may disagree with you (I wouldn’t), but if your reasons are spelled out, I can make my own judgments from there.
All of this is a long way of posing this question:
Couldn’t you have a print magazine that does honest reviews and well-written commentary, by people who truly love cars in all (most?) of their forms, supported by advertisers who have nothing to do with making or selling cars? People that read car magazines buy clothes, computers, office supplies, food, and yes, sex pills. Top Gear regularly trashes cars that deserve it, and yet they don’t seem to have trouble getting cars to review. The readership fleeing in droves from the buff books must want something better, so why can’t a print magazine give it to them? If your reviews are thorough and honest, and your biases and “freebies” made plain, people will read your stuff even if your review is “late”. Not everyone seeking a review is planning to buy a car. Some of us just like cars.
Part of me says that if this could work, somebody would already be doing it. Another part of me says that the existing auto-journalist culture is so entrenched in the old ways that they can’t envision doing things any other way. I don’t claim to know the answer, but it seems to me that it could be made to work. I’m just not is a position to do anything about it.