“Whilst? Are you actually British, or are you just an inbred Appalachian hillbilly moonshiner?” That one didn’t make it through the moderating process. Until now. In the normal course of events, I delete any comments that attack TTAC’s editorial stance or style, and invite the commentator to discuss our choices off-line. Rest assured, I can stand the heat. It’s just that meta comments rapping TTAC’s “bias” or piss-poor prose—rather than focusing on the content itself—drag the comment section off-topic. (It’s not all about us.) Normally, comments like “why did you publish that” and “your writing sucks” constitute a small percentage of the total number deleted. But as Detroit’s defenders have had something of a wake-up call, I’m not encountering as many “See you at Death Watch 23,344 asshole!” and “Fuck you you import-loving faggot” remarks. Which gives us a little breathing room to address the stance and style issues. I’ll explain myself after the jump. But feel free to diss our writing or content choices below without their consideration. And for this post, the no-flame rule is suspended (within reason).
There are two main reasons why TTAC’s writing style can be so. . . florid.
First, in the main, we’re regurgitators (technical term: blog). I’d love to generate original industry reportage with a team of stringers, but we don’t have the budget for the job. So we’re largely restricted to ripping stories from elsewhere. To gain and maintain an audience, we have to add value to this material. De-spinning it—presenting the truth of the matter—is our main weapon in this war of words. After that, infotainment. And that’s where the going gets fluff.
If a blog falls in the forest and no one reads it, who cares how much insight it provides? No one, obviously. That’s why, as a writer, my goal is to get the reader from the first sentence to the last. I use every literary technique I know to “trick” TTAC’s readers into swallowing the red pill. Puns, obscure words, alliteration, word play, sarcasm, irony, F-bombs, dumb jokes, whatever it takes. As an editor, I look for writers with the same talents. And yes, I add material to “jazz up” submissions.
This is a double-edged sword. The prose limits our appeal to the masses; reading TTAC requires a high school reading level or better. According to our stats, our literary aspirations (and that is all they are) help create loyalty amongst a small, relatively upmarket demographic. We have over 11k subscribers (out of 40k daily unique visitors), who generate over two page views per visit. So we’re doing something right.
The second reason for the funky prose: keeping ourselves amused. By now, I’ve written over a million words for this site. (TTAC publishes more material in one day than a car magazine produces in one week.) In a room. Alone. If I didn’t make myself laugh, I wouldn’t be here. It’s as simple as that.
And there you have it. Aside from the fact that yes, we do make mistakes. Yesterday’s post on Chevrolet’s inventory levels was completely off-base; I misread the data. So I’ve withdrawn it. Another controversial choice, but that’s how I roll.
Your turn. Are we too clever for our own good?
Well, to say the least – the site definitely has a slant – which I read with a big grain of salt.
That said, I mine the info for tidbits that are not covered in the MSM – and – then judge whether it is over zealous bias or a real automotive news.
Recently, I was a major critic of TTAC. I felt it lost its way and the quality of the articles were falling.
But, recently, the articles are back on form. What was missing from them was the savage wit and beautiful punnery (“It’s muda out there!” still makes me laugh).
It’s very easy to write cold, souless articles (A bit like a Toyota Corolla) but where would be the fun in that? I want more articles with flair, passion and grace (Like a Jaguar), ok maybe “grace” is pushing it, slightly, but you get the point.
I was reading Autoblog and whilst they chuck out more blogs a day than TTAC, the stories get more and more tenuously linked to the car industry, simply because they’re trying to fill the pages with ANYTHING. Focus is the key point, here (Hey! Another car reference! If you can call it a “car”…)
My only 2 gripes about TTAC are:
1. A lot of people say TTAC are import lovers. This cannot be the case as TTAC are normally quite harsh on the European car industry, especially the UK car industry. We’re not bad guys!
2. Are the “wild-arse rumours” really necessary? What information can we really glean from what is, essentially, conjecture?
Other than that. Keep on rolling, TTAC. You’ve got a few more bankruptcies to cover!
P.S. After reading the flamers’ comment in your article, I became appalled. Don’t these people know how to punctuate? Don’t they know it should be:
“See you at Death Watch 23,444, asshole”
or
“Fuck you, you import loving faggot”
As for the person who asked “Are you British?”, I’d take that as a compliment! ;O)
P.P.S I do miss the podcasts. Can’t they be 15 minutes, instead of 10? 10 is just too short.
Just stay away from “betwixt”…
Trust me.
I kind of see it like a unicorn. Your writing has all sorts of sparkles and rainbows but when it gets down to it, it still has a point.
I actually thought that comment was surprisingly arch and clever. If someone intelligently pokes you like that I find it a shame that has to be censored.
I hate sites that cheerlead. I had a certain distaste for slightly juvenile sites like Jalopnik. I like TTAC because it is honest and I find that even with a university education, the literary standards are quite high. There is surprisingly little antagonism between commenters.
Why don’t you try a more low brow style and see how it gets you? There’s plenty of low brow motoring sites out there already though.
No. Your site and style encourages people to interpret what they read, not simply digest information.
Robert, don’t change a thing. If you laugh out loud while writing alone in your room, we do the same in the office (only my laughs can be heard throughout cubicleland). The education level of your site is the reason I read as often as I do, and the reason it’s the best of the car blogs.
I look forward to TTAC to fulfill my lunch hour daily, and sometimes, like this morning, I can’t wait and must peek to see what juicy bits are waiting for me at noon.
Katie, you’re my favorite (favourite) of the Best & Brightest, and your wit is indeed Jaguar-esque. Keep posting!
If you save the deleted comments it might be fun to every once and a while post them in their own special blog entry just for laughs
KatiePuckrik
Don’t they know it should be:
“See you at Death Watch 23,444, asshole”
or
“Fuck you, you import loving faggot”
Actually it should be
“Fuck you, you import-loving faggot”
I enjoy your style of writing, the humour, the word play and all that. Sometimes I might not understand your funny references/comparisons, but I laugh anyway as it feels good and it’s faster than trying to figure out who or what the referenced person/thing actually is.
I’ve read car-related articles elsewhere attempting to humour the reader, but the result was quite poor. Not so here. Which is why I visit your website almost every day.
I enjoy the site or I wouldn’t be here.I guess what, I never finished high school.Never would’a guessed eh?
I come to grips with the fact that domestic bashing is TTAC’s gig.Some of the comments are mean, spitefull and drip with hate.Class warfare is alive and well at TTAC.However its a one sided war.RF, you got a hard core group of followers that clap and applaud you every word,and the fan base is building.TTAC will survive and prosper.TTAC an unbiased source of auto information?Not a chance!Pro domestic’s or “fan boys” as we are called either get deleted or banned.Or like myself,give up.
The Chevy field stock piece.You know, 300 days inventory and all.Would distorted be the proper word?The turning point for me,was the photos of pre production Camaro’s.So now I look upon TTAC as a source entertainment,with the odd tid bit of real news.
Frank, actually it should be:
“See you at Death Watch 23,444, asshole!”
Because forgetting a punctuation mark leaves it
to interpretation. For example, putting the question mark at the end, “See you at Death Watch 23,444, asshole?”, would imply that the assholer
is suggesting that he will meet the assholee at that Death Watch = completely different meaning.
The first one is of contempt, the second one could be of a wishful thinking.
Where else can one learn of the VW service arrogance, the decline and decontenting of Toyota, the rise of Hyundaism and the sheer lunacy of GM management.
Reading of the unearned sense of entitlement of the UAW and the non availabilty of some fine Euro models of various makes.
Combine all this with masterful witty prose and voila — the best damn carblog in the world.
It is fine fine work you do Robert.
INTERNET: SERIOUS BUSINESS!
I read TTAC for the cars AND for the lulz, so keep on trucking. Besides, how else am I supposed to entertain myself at work while my auto-supplier employer slowly circles the drain?
In general I am a big fan of TTAC and this is one of about 6 internet pages I always open when I start Internet.
This said, I am not totally happy.
1. What has angered me a few times already were articles from Bertel Schmitt about some german issues, where he uses Nazi camp photos or tries to linke the story somehow to nazi history. I find this stupid, and I am clearly offended. This has the same quality as the stereotypical british movie showing a type of stereotypical german Nazi officer. The story gets lost by using such superficial stereotypes.
2. Overall, I feel TTAC is only negative and always knows it better. Nothing, really nothing, what is done by Ford or others finds any kind of approval. Managers and companies want to survive, and they have to do what they can do. If you would be in their position, you also would need to make some choices – you cannot just stop your work or think Ch11 is the only choice.
Are we too clever for our own good?
No. I wish there was more sites like this in other genre’s or interests as well, especially concerning the comment filtering.
I love the site; I’m on here every day. Probably more than I need to know about every blip in the automotive sphere, but it really is the EXCELLENT writing that keeps me reading just about every article. Your particular point of view is what makes TTAC what it is. We all already know that it’s an opinion based blog going in. Don’t change a thing!!
I am not worried about any “domestic bashing.” What I see is extremely tough writing about the state of affairs at GM and Chrysler, but I also see surprisingly GOOD reviews of recent Big 3 products here.
I see nothing wrong with lambasting the GM and Chrysler executives and the government. Daily I read ridiculous quotes from these people about the business that shows over and over that they have no idea what they are doing. Keep up the good work.
No, Robert. It’s why I’m here.
These are the most honest car reviews I’ve ever read, and they keep me coming back every day looking for more. I love the references I don’t necessarily understand, that make me think about what I’m reading. I laugh out loud at my desk at some of them. Sadly, this and the daily crossword are the most intellectually stimulating things I do all day. Please don’t stop, I implore you.
TireGuy
Overly negative? I used to think so. And it used to get me down. Which is why I’ve actively solicited contrary, positive opinions (Ressler and others). Without much luck, for some reason.
And then I realized that a journalist’s job is to question EVERYTHING. To assume that everyone is lying or hiding something. That there’s something wrong with every product (it may not be serious, but it’s there.)
I know: just as Detroit’s legions of cheerleaders see what they want to see, so do we. Only one of us is dedicated to telling the truth, more so than the other. A point which I’ve made about 1,000 times so far. Literally.
Anyway, some of our guys cheer, on occasion. Elias complimented Ford, just before the stock surge (BTW). Other than that, uh, how about you write something? (robertfarago1@gmail.com),
And believe it or not, our deep cynicism comes from a place of love. We ate the apple, but remember the garden.
The level of writing, the use of words, the up to minute reporting, all are an attraction.
I don’t agree with a lot of your opinions, especially on domestic stuff, but the style and clever weaving of information and humor, outrage and offense is way more than enough to keep me coming back.
As much as I respect and enjoy TTAC, I was blindsided by the warning I got for flaming the site, when no such flame was intended. And not even in the same realm as the ones quoted above.
TTAC is the BS filter. Before I go on the fan sites that usually use the manufacturer’s PR releases as concrete news and the last word,I read TTAC’s take on the news. It provides the balance to the fan sites where “all brands have problems” and “just wait till they really wake the sleeping giant”. TTAC cuts through all the excuse making and finger pointing that generally comes from the management of the domesttic 3 and filters down to the marque partisans and becomes gospel.
One of the sites has a member [and a sales hack too] that jumps down the throat of anyone pointing out that the end of Saturn is in the cards and accuses the poster of slander and trolling.
So yes, it’s nice to have TTAC sift through the crap and leave the juvenile fan boy mewling to the other sites. I no longer even post on them. And since I already have been conscripted into supporting these ill run companies, I have no long wave the flag for any brand.
TTAC is as much about it’s style as it is about information. You could say it’s the Walter Winchell of Internet automotive reporting.
{ some may consider that a flame }
No reading that again, the WW reference is a flame. I take it back. Bad comparison. But TTAC will change the way journalists do things out there. Flag this post and the date. I will be proven correct in time.
As I always say in these meta-discussions, yes, you are on the right path, and no, don’t change a thing about it. And when I feel something else, I will tell you so. And for all the people who can’t take the heat, they should stay out of the motherfucking kitchen.
Keep doing what you do. If people don’t like it, they can go elsewhere. Personally, I think it balances all the overly optimistic articles, etc. on websites such as GM Inside News where GM is worshiped by the site’s commentators. There really is little to be optimistic or positive about these days in the auto industry. I think most people don’t want to see or read that.
Too negative? Hmmm. You’re negative…no question. Too negative? I suspect that’s all a matter of perspective. I think the insights here can be amazingly good. But behind most of it, I think it hard to digest that you seem almost sadistically delighted in what’s happening in Detroit. To wit, you’ve correctly predicted the fate of GM and Chrysler…but now you are critical of even how the bankruptcies are going down. At least a year or so ago, you trumpeted bankruptcy as a method of saving Detroit, now it’s simply the best way to drive a death-nail into it.
Second, the policy of simply killing any question or protest of content is as chicken-shit as it gets…sorry, but that’s the truth. There’s nothing more unsavory than someone who can dish it out but refuses to take it. Only because you asked…..
I personally enjoy the way TTAC is put together. Any website can throw out the hard facts and numbers to support them. It takes real cojones to actually put personal opinion to those facts without regard to the heat that could possibly generate. As has been pointed out in many threads here on TTAC, the car rags seem to be pretty bad (and getting worse) about pandering to their sponsors and laying down for an automaker just so they can get a chance to drive that new model, or get exclusive rights to the first pictures of this car’s mid-cycle update. Piss on that. Whether I agree with the opinions of the writers and commentators here or not, it’s greatly refreshing to read true, honest to God (if you believe in that) opinions that aren’t watered down. Keep doing what you’re doing here, people wouldn’t keep coming back if it sucked.
I usually appreciate the wordplay, obscure cultural references, and high school vocab.
There are times though, when it’s clear you’re trying too hard in your pursuit of verisimilitude. Eschew obfuscation, and cut the 10-cent word now and then.
First off, I like the level of vocabulary used in TTAC posts; I wouldn’t change a damn thing there.
On another note, the site used to have major issues with interpreting *every-friggin’-thing* having to do with domestic manufacturers as a sure-fire sign that the end was/is nigh.
While things are certainly dire, I don’t think that the verbal carpet-bombing was appropriate; Ford has done more things *right* than the others (no, I don’t own one), so I think the criticism should be targeted at… you know… the ones who DESERVE it the most.
That said, the site has improved a great deal, even over the past few weeks; there have been more reviews, and less redundant “Bailout Watch 10,000: Mullally Ate a Burger” posts.
So, in summary, props to Farago for keeping the site together despite a crappy economic climate.
prthug
Far be it for me to argue with a man who calls himself “prthug.” So I’ll just say this: I called for bankruptcy when bankruptcy offered Detroit a way out—if executed properly (kill/sell brands, improve products, renegotiate work rules, etc.).
Now, it’s too late. The well has been poisoned. And even if it hasn’t, the people executing the bankruptcy proceedings are doing so with as tenuous a grip on reality as the people who got the automakers into this position in the first place. (No real surprise: they’re the same people.) As we shall see.
As for not allowing people to criticize the content, I call bullshit. I have never removed a comment because an opinion differed from mine or the writers.
The posting policy is clear: no flaming the website, its authors or fellow commentators. If you want to discuss the definition of flaming, or my implementation of this policy, bring it.
“for this post, the no-flame rule is suspended”
I feel like I’m Will Farrell in the movie Old School right after Vince Vaughn says, “Ear muffs!”
There is a strong urge to start spewing gratuitous vulgarity!
The style is ok, but IMHO a little bit over the top.
What I don’t like are the articles that are published that obviously involve illegal & highly dangerous behavior (Baruths driving comes to mind).
I can’t figure out if I’m in the minority or majority here.
On the “vw/driver training/120mph” accident I think i was in the majority. In other articles (like the porsche one that was posted recently), I think I’m in the minority.
I enjoy the spice and the diversity of writing styles I see here, even if it sometimes reminds me too much of Car and Driver in the 80s. No complaints there.
Of course the substance is another matter, but we all bring our biases to that. I pretty much ignore the class warfare posts anymore, and feel that that there are some agendas being pushed a little, even if it is touted as the “truth”. But as a reader, it is my privilege and obligation to question everything that gets put up here too. After all, if you’re not cynical, you don’t know what’s going on, right?
Are we too clever for our own good?
No.
And if you would, the fault would ours (readers), not yours (writers).
You can not be “too clever”, because we live by our minds.
The second reason for the funky prose: keeping ourselves amused. By now, I’ve written over a million words for this site. (TTAC publishes more material in one day than a car magazine produces in one week.) In a room. Alone. If I didn’t make myself laugh, I wouldn’t be here.
A quote from “The Fountainhead” come in handy:
** “I have, let’s say sixty years to live. Most of that time will be spent working. I’ve chosen the work I want to do. If I find no joy in it, then I’m only condemning myself to sixty years of torture. And I can find the joy only if I do my work in the best way possible to me. But the best is a matter of standards—and I set my own standards”
As far as I’m concerned, I still love the website, after several years of reading. Too much deathwatch-related material, but it’s what dominates the news.
The writing style is witty and funny, and a TTAC specificity. Keep it up.
I disagree with some op-eds (the Baruth piece on uber-speeding), but they are op-eds, i.e. opinions to be discussed, and therefore do have their place on the website.
Nah, it’s all fine. Now I’m just trying to find another car-related videogame to review for you…
The writing tends to be snarky and can come of a tad snotty but I don’t see any real issues with it if that’s what you are looking for. I do think you may want to look at getting another domain name or renaming the site because it seems (and for quite a while now) that it’s not “The Truth About Cars” but “The Truth About The Auto Industry and Related Business” There isn’t much “Car” here anymore and probably wasn’t a great deal to begin with.
In honesty, I find the constant harping on domestics a bit tiresome, though I’m fully recognizant of the fact that they mismanaged their way into this mess.
One thing that chafes me is that the site seems to always manage to turn even positive news into horrible, dire, awful negative news. It’s lightened up a bit recently, but it’s still there. A couple of weeks ago, Ford posted a significantly lower quarterly loss than was anticipated, and there were a few articles across the MSM and autoblogosphere about it. TTAC was there with a long “Ford is still doomed and crappy” article. I don’t think TTAC is necessarily guilty of domestic bashing, but it just seems like there’s no room whatsoever for good news. I’m not stupid – a company losing money isn’t good news, but losing less money than anticipated is somewhat better than bad news. Managerially, I think Ford is doing a lot of things right, but I sure didn’t come to that conclusion by reading this site.
I love cars. I love ’em like I did when I was a little kid. I’m fascinated by the mechanical complexity and design challenges and how they need to overcome various limitations of physics. They’re wonderful and enchanting and excite the imagination. I think TTAC has lost that sense and has focused a bit too much on the incompetent people who got us into trouble from a business perspective. Cars are magic, and it’s unfortunate to see that magic ignored so we can focus our efforts at sneering at the men behind the curtain.
You’re free to spread doom and gloom about the automakers, particularly the beleaguered domestics, but it’s kind of sad that the love is gone from the site. I understand that with budget limitations you might not be able to do as many reviews or comparos or actual car-focused work and it’s more budget-friendly to de-spin the news, but man, where’s the love? A bit more focus on the product, a bit less focus on the industry might do you well. It makes me sad coming here sometimes, and I think that’s too bad because this is a well-written and insightful website.
So maybe my main suggestion would be to quit making me so sad, don’t make TTAC an unpleasant Internet experience. Keep your hawkeye on the industry, but don’t forget there’s always a glimmer of hope, even if you have to really search for it, and there are some great cars out there from every manufacturer and that’s something to celebrate, even in these tough times.
1.) Can you just say torque instead of “twist”?
2.) Can you stop saying “slush box”?
3.) No one gives a damn how a Chevy HHR behaves when “thrown into a corner”. No person buys said car to throw it into a corner. Such talk is only appropriate when talking about emergency maneuvers. In short, stop treating every car like it should be a champ on a road course.
4.)Yeah, we get it; ALL cars have crappy interiors. Short of gold plating nothing will pass muster for a good interior with your reviewers.
5.) Other overused words, phrases:
– parts bin
– craptastic
– “row your boat”
Thanks.
Robert –
I’m laughing at the image of you cackling, ALONE, in your room; this leaks from virtually everything you write. There are times I am aggravated by what I read, there are times when I’m left shaking my head at people’s inability to remove their heads from their nether parts and there are times when I can simply cackle alone at the creativity shown by both the TTAC writers and the many excellent comments which are elicited. I, like many here, log on at least once a day and will go through several articles, often reading many of the comments. I hope you keep laughing (and writing) for a long time.
I have subscribed to C&D for most of my adult life and in large part because they worked not only to breathlessly shill for car manufacturers but because they managed to get in the occasional zinger despite their need to draw advertisers. TTAC has no obligation to shill for anyone, and the zingers are even more consistent.
Thanks for a great site.
Well, if you look at your recent exchange on Autoline, you don’t have to change much. In the world of auto blogs, you have AutoBlog, Jalopnik, and DeLorenzo’s self lovefest. On Autoline, there was no way a person with his head so far up his ass could be bothered to have a discussion with a commoner like you. You allow comments, and encourage debate about every article posted. Living in Detroit, I am so tired of the Detroit 3 cheerleading. TTAC is my one escape from this, that still covers the auto industry. You are the only one talking about Toyota following into the footsteps of GM into their own financial decline.
Got a question RF.A couple of weeks ago you had a little chat live with Peter De,the auto extremest dude.
Being a print journalist,and a good one I might add.You were totally out of your comfort zone.
That being said,I thought you held your own quite well.Even though you were out numbered,you proved you had some gonad’s.A lot of guys would of got up and walked away,I would of.In verbal fistacuffs I can hold my own with the best of them.I would of told the fat bastard”to guy go f–k himself.But you didn’t,in my world that makes you the victor,and the better person.
Why then was all referance and comments of the show,and links removed from TTAC?Like it never happened?Just asking.
mikey
I thought I gave a lousy performance: nervous, defensive and aggressive. Too much adrenalin, not enough experience.
Putting the battle on TTAC lowered the tone of the place. If you can believe that. So I pulled it.
Worldwide implosion of the car industry. The bk of of some of the largest car companies on the planet. Billions of tax dollars being wasted propping up idiots. Thousands of hard working people loosing their jobs. Oil companies in bed with governments in bed with 3rd world dictators.
Gee… what IS there to be negative about?
That is why I’m here. The truth really bites right now. And TTAC is the only place that is calling a spade a spade.
Overall props all around for the erudite level of discourse generally found here.
Ditto to what many others have already said; when the MSM runs a news item on the D3 I head here to get the real story/commentary/insight.
I enjoy the challenging/funny/punny/clever wordplay. (…can’t think of many other sites where I have to regularly Google a word or a cultural reference…I like that.)
Thumbs down: Too much vulgarity. If I was King of the Internet I’d keep it to PG-13 (…at the worst). Yeah yeah I know….everyone else drops F-bombs that way. (….and …. as we all say to our kids, “Does that make it right?”)
Ditto (yeah I like Rush too) Robstar’s comment:
…. the articles …. that obviously involve illegal & highly dangerous behavior (Baruths driving comes to mind).
Maybe it’s his redlined-in-your-face-arrogance that drives me nuts inasmuch as I’m usually in favor of reading about illegal and really stupid car shenanigans. …. I’ll see what my therapist has to say about that one and report back.
Lastly, once in a blue moon an article gets posted for a while and then vanishes without a trace. …no explanation, nothing. Suggetion: At least post an explanation as to what the backstory is. Otherwise it just stokes our inner (right/left wing) conspiracy demons.
….Two examples: The recent stunning video of you doing intellectual hot laps around Messrs Delorenzo, Vines, and McElroy vanished into thin air (I know, you explained it offline 1:1).
….the other was a while back there was a post about some young lady in New England(?) that had a YouTube auto-tie-in of some sort ….(can’t remember the details.) Anyway, I think she turned out to not be who she said she was and you pulled the post. But without any comment.
I wish thier were gooder english on the reveiws so eyes could understand more better.
I have a feeling that once the great D2.5 collapse is complete , TTAC will lose %85 of its content. No more easy ways to fill content by slamming feckless CEO’s and stunned Board of Directors. Then posting endless financial numbers and car counts.
This will be TTAC’s biggest challenge to maintain the site volume and quality. The content left is erratic in focus and quality and will have to quickly evolve to fill the void.
BTW The car reviews lately are much better. Not wanna be Clarkson or pre decided bias. Just review the car experience as per is price/value
But I do concur with others..
Do you chaps(TTAC) actually like cars ?
RF et al,
I love the style and hope you don’t let the haters influence how TTAC is edited. Good prose writing always starts with a consideration of one’s audience, and despite the claim above that your posts are written for yourself alone in a room, I think it’s clear that you and your writers have a very keen sense of just who is reading TTAC. Kudos for putting your audience first; many bloggers have plenty to say but struggle to get their message out because they haven’t learned what it really means to communicate. I grew up reading “Calvin and Hobbes” comics, and the high-falutin’ diction in that strip forced me to elevate my game, reading-wise. I suppose that’s where my appreciation for sophisticated wordsmithing comes from, and I am glad the movement isn’t dead.
Also, I suppose you can disregard my earlier email, as right after I sent it I was, clearly, able to log in and post a comment on this page. My finger is pointed squarely at the Gremlins (non-AMC, of course…).
Well, given that you chose to make the majority of your subject matter about the screw-ups and failures of the auto industry, your tone isn’t too negative. Your chosen subject matter is inherently negative.
Sure, you occasionally step over the line, but that’s how you find out where the line is.
I DO REALLY WISH you’d extend your flaming/OT policy to include politics. It seems the one area where personal attacks are still permitted, and I don’t understand what it adds to the discussion.
Not to fear TTAC will still have material. The complete collapse of the Det 2.5 isn’t gonn’a
happen for quite sometime.
Add my voice to the list of “Atta Boys” for TTAC. I enjoy the style and I usually check check in first thing in the morning to see what is going on in the various “Death Watch / Bailout Watch / Zombie Watch” series. I’ve also exchanged emails with RF several times and appreciate that he responds quickly.
PS: I survived 39 years at Ford in Engineering and TTAC’s insight on what ails the industry (especially GM) is remarkable.
+1 jakecarolan:
Cars are magic, and it’s unfortunate to see that magic ignored so we can focus our efforts at sneering at the men behind the curtain.
I’ll give you the love of the old, old Big 3 cars, although sometimes it feels like the Edgar Allen Poe poem Annabel Lee:
…For the moon never beams without bringing me dreams
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee Detroit Big 3;
And the stars never rise but I feel the bright eyes
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee Detroit Big 3;
And so, all the night-tide, I lie down by the side
Of my darling- my darling- my old car and my pride,
In the sepulchre there by the sea parking lot of the Big 3,
In her tomb by the sounding seain the parking lot of the Big 3.
It might be nice to read a positive spin review of, say, the New Camaro or some of Ford’s new products that show they’re on the right path (Fusion?) instead of dwelling on the long dead Annabel Lee cars of the past.
Having said that, everyone loves curmudgeon and TTAC fills a need. I enjoy it, and I wouldn’t change it. Anyhow, trying to change yourself too much is a recipe for failure. Just don’t do it.
I think that the Big 3 bashing comment is probably true but its origins are misunderstood. I think you’d just as cheerfully bash Toyota, Honda, or BMW, but you don’t currently have as much material on them available to you.
I can’t wait for you to start in on Fiat. There’s plenty of nondomestic material waiting there.
By the way, am I the only one amused by the fact that the Chrysler link-up with Fiat is being forced on us by fiat despite bankruptcy law?
–“An arbitrary decree or pronouncement, esp. by a person or group of persons having absolute authority to enforce it: The king Obama rules by fiat. “
Having just completed my monthly tour through C&D, R&T, and Automobile, it seems to me that TTAC provides a valuable counterpoint.
The ‘buff books’ have largely become fanzines, with the recent coverage of the new Camaro being a particularly egregious example of over-the-top fawning.
Someone (and it might as well be us) needs to point out ‘The Truth’.
Yes, compared to 20-30 years ago, modern cars are amazingly good. But with the overall bar raised, some cars are standouts, and others are not measuring up. TTAC is far more honest about that than most.
Of course there will be things to write about. When better cars are built, TTAC will post some positive reviews…
If anything, I wished you’d be more aggressive with deleting posts and banning posters. If I read one more post that takes the subject away from cars into a guvment bashing, Republicans vs Democrats theme I am going to scream. There are 100s if not 1000s of websites where you can sound off about that crap. I read TTAC because I’ve had my fill of that for the time being.
I think there will be plenty of fodder left, post-bankrupcy for a little while (like a year or two), then maybe you will have to look to expand other content. That’s why I think you should encourage questions of the day, wtf is this car, and the awesome curbside classics. Or, riffing on the currently fashionable interview style ‘Tell me about a time when ‘something’ happened while you were driving.’ Keep it clean folks.
And remind people to contribute articles more often.
Totally off topic..R.I.P Oshawa Truck….About an hour ago the last truck rolled off the line.
A sad day in the Shwa!
too negative? Strangely, I only seem to think so when I disagree with the position. :)
That being said, I started reading the site when I discovered the car reviews, which were a nice negative-perspective balance to the overly positive reviews most other place.
The editorials, I probably only read a quarter of them. Usually by the 3rd sentence I disagree with the premise it is based on and see little point in hitting myself in the head repeatedly.
I say: Keep on keepin’ on. I’m a big boy, I can filter my own content. As someone who is *hopeful* he’ll be able to buy a Fiat-147-in-Dodge-Clothing in a few years, I strongly suspect I’m not part of the “target market” anyway.
I don’t understand folks saying this site is negative; I have always perceived this site as being skeptical, inquisitive, and realistic. Part of being skeptical and realistic is nay-saying spouters of unsupported claims. Challenging personal and/or journalistic integrity is another admirable quality of both RF and the site in general that I think many people perceive as “negative” when in reality it is a long-term positive.
I must say I’ve enjoyed TTAC as long as I’ve been reading (maybe just over a year?). Since the domestics have entered the final death throes I’ve noticed the shift toward more industry-related discussion and a slight abstraction from product-related postings. At the same time I perceive a general increase in the number of postings. This leads me to think that while post-carmageddon site content may subside from present levels it will return to pre-deathwatch levels of product-releated mix.
I do think that post-carmageddon content level and interest could be enhanced by continuing to logical extents the commentary on industry one step or two removed from cars as products. You have already editorialized on a manufacturer of car care products. I’m specifically suggesting re-thinking the site’s aversion to racing commentary. Not that I care about who won what race or whose team is doing what; I think some healthy poignant commentary regarding sanctioning-body shenanigans (and boondoggles) in various motorsport arenas could be interesting.
I noticed that immediately after the recent editorial appointment was made there was a temporary increase in “NSFW”-ing out some vulgarity, which seems to have subsided. I don’t know if this was a conscious decision or a byproduct of varying levels of editorial intervention. Every now and again some pages get caught by my company’s content filter. I don’t know what trips it or why (and can’t think of recent pages to hold out as examples), but keeping things generally civil in most respects would conform to the usual anti-flaming policy.
If anything I’d say you aren’t offensive enough (loved the Nazi references). Let loose the dogs of war I say, every post. Also, more vulgarity, it seriously lightens the tone of the posts and has a good effect on the commenter’s subsequent style.
Maybe a little less personal criticism of those you consider apologists and more good natured, yet still offensive, mockery (nationality, ethnicity, the likelihood of their wives infideltiy…these are all excellent jumping off points), in short, a lighter but still barbed tone. Taking this tact might engender a few less, “Fuck Farago and fuck TTAC” responses and a few more replies. This isn’t the House of Commons, it’s the internet.
Robert,
I normally visit this site 2-3 times a day. Why? The wit, humor, reviews, rumors, insight, and so on. I feel TTAC is one of the better informational and entertainment venues I commonly peruse. We have had our arguments in the past, a few times via email and deleted posts. I am not one for over abuse of swear words but I do have some for the Detroit faithful. While most of you believe your beloved autos are being victimized I must say, look at the competition.
If you think Chrysler or GM offer “competitive” models you are only further proving your automotive ignorance. An as American taxpayer I am embarrassed and disgusted that my money is propping up these corporate welfare recipients. All the Kool-Aid drinkers can kiss my entire ass. If I wanted to support these shit stains I would have wasted my money on one of their products. By hey, at least you “buy American”.
Hillbilly’s are always the last to evolve…
A bit more focus on the product, a bit less focus on the industry might do you well
I disagree: Products are not a Deus ex machina. Products are made by an industry. The industrial side adds depth and meaning to the products.
My favorite example: The original Mini. A technological, cultural and sales success. But an industrial disaster: The car was sold at a loss. Without the “industry” side you can not really understand the “product”, the Mini.
Ditto for the “dull, soulless, gray, bland, appliances of wheels” built by Toyota. You can not really understand those cars if you do take a good look at their (highly successful) business side.
For the moon never beams without bringing me dreams
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee Detroit Big 3;
And the stars never rise but I feel the bright eyes
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee Detroit Big 3;
My G*d. I feel something like that when I think about the once-wonderful company that created the Chrysler Airflow.
This music as a background for that poem.
@Turn off the anti flaming system and what do you get?…..Ryan
Robert,
I highly enjoy the wit and tone of the articles here. It is one thing that keep’s me coming back every day. I have posted more by far on this site than any other I subscribe to. I also enjoy the fact that many of the other commentators are also amusing to read. So many sites have shrill, angry commentators that drown out the actual discussion with name calling.
Us hillbilly’s prefer Hillfolk.
I just looked at the Ten best for 2008 list. And it reminded me that there are some great cars out there. And then you look at the list, you realize that there is a lot of CRAP out there also.
Perhaps the site and/or reviews can mention or “set the bar” of the cars which are praised regularly by all of us.
Yeah, there is a review of the latest Corolla, which is a boring/reliable car with as much imagination as your bargain basement refrigerator. But perhaps just a mention that hey, for the same price, you can get a Mazda 3. If Mazda can do it, why can’t you Toyota?
By definition, most cars will be 3 stars or below. Perhaps just a mention of the 4/5 star vehicles in reviews/editorials/news might remind us all of how good the cars can be, and how crappy a lot of them are.
Fuck the haters. TTAC is great.
For the most part I just read the BK series and Bertel.
The one criticism would be that no other site gives one as much of a feeling that the maximum number of clicks to navigate is required.
Turns people off, sort of like when the Jehova’s Witnesses knock on the door more then once.
And often has a National Enquirer’ish tone to some articles.
Well Robert, as you do ask…..
Overall I love this site. I too have noticed a strong Anglophile tendency in a lot of the writing but I can’t really complain about that as I am a Brit ex-pat myself. (Oh, and I have had to stop using the word “whilst” in my written communications and document since I moved to the US too!). I’ll sum up what I see as the pros and cons of this site :-
PROS
1. You have been largely right about the demise of the Detroit companies when no other media outlet was accurately predicting how this would turn out. That was what attracted me to this site in the first place and even if I might make other criticisms of the site – the fact that TTAC has got it right on the big story of the impending disaster for Detroit justifies its existence. I have always found it amazing that the main stream media, and especially the so-called broadsheet papers who supposedly should provide in-depth and expert analysis, failed to really report how bad things were? I always wonder whether this was due to some deliberate editorial reluctance to damn the home team, or just lazy or incompetent journalism missing the big issue?
2. The intellectual standard of the main writers and contributors of comments is very high. The quality of the background knowledge and analytical thought is the best I have seen anywhere. By contrast, I used to read the letters forum of the DetNews to get a feel for the vox-pop opinion on the state of Detroit automakers but I gave up in the end because the posts were just very poor quality and mainly constituted a bi-partisan screaming match between the blinkered “domestic cars are every bit as good as anything the imports sell” UAW/Detroit fanboys and a few equally blinkered UAW-haters on the other side. There was very little intelligent discussion of the issues just petty name-calling and perpetuation of whichever myths suited their particular one-sided argument.
3. The site allows a reasonable level of free speech. I support the need for the sort of anti-flaming policy that Robert operates and I do get the feeling that he is genuinely open to “off-line” correspondence if appropriate. As I stated in point 2, the comments subsequent to the articles often contain well presented opinions that may be highly contradictory to another contributors comments yet they are generally tolerated with good grace – and for me the opportunity to contemplate these often disparate views contributes to the intellectual depth of the discussion. Obviously this means that there will be many times when I will not agree with the opinions expressed but I appreciate a forum like this that allows such views to be aired in a civilized fashion.
4. Many of the contributors to the comments on this site have specialist business or technical knowledge which I do not have and I have learned a lot form reading their input. I think because this site provides such a good forum for intellectual discussion of the issues it tends to attract people who like to consider said issues from a very educated and analytical viewpoint and their insightful feedback adds to the quality of the discussion. I guess that is some sort of self-fulfilling feedback loop – the more intelligent the discussion the more intelligent the contributors it tends to draw in?
CONS
1. Is there an anti-Domestic bias to this site? Yes, I believe there is slightly. I do not believe that the editorial stance of this site leads the writers to consciously look for excuses to bash the domestic automakers at every opportunity but I do think that in working hard to point out problems with these automakers (which have so often been glossed over or denied in other media outlets) I sometimes feel that a little excessive glee is being shown? I guess it is hard to get a good balance. If one of the core missions of this site is to point out what is happening to the domestic car industry, and just about every piece of news coming out of that industry is bad – then it is hard to pretend that you are also covering all the “good news” too if there really isn’t much of that to go around? There might be very thin line between “documenting the decline of the domestic auto industry” and “reveling in the decline of the domestic auto industry”?
2. I sometimes find the use of trendy phrases or acronyms a bit much. I was very glad to see the word “hoon” disappear from usage on this site and will be glad to see “NSFW” fade too. I do appreciate that the substitution of text-message style acronyms like “WTF” may have some limited usefulness in avoiding using the actual expletive word but it does get a bit tedious after while. I have to admit that as I do not regularly use cell-phone text-messaging myself sometimes I just don’t know what the acronyms means. (No, I am not 100 years old I just don’t use text-messaging). I’ve seen comments from other contributors having to ask for an explanation at times so obviously that is not just me. This may just be my personal opinion but I feel that in the spirit of openness a forum like TTAC should attempt to stay away from a situation where only “insiders” who are up to speed with all the in-jokes and special phrases can fully understand the discussions.
3. I sometimes feel that there is an air of smug pompousness about some of the comments left by contributors. This often takes the form of some statement like “You can’t be a real enthusiast if you buy a xxxxx (insert choice of “appliance” here)” or “The people who buy Toyota Camrys just don’t know anything about cars”. Fair disclosure – I have owned a Toyota Camry in the past and currently own an old Toyota Avalon. I find this sort of attitude offensive on two levels. Firstly, it makes a totally fallacious assumption that just because one chooses to buy one vehicle on the criteria of reliability, utility and long-term cost-effectiveness – that you cannot simultaneously be a car enthusiast. Choice of car is driven by budget considerations for most of us. Yes, I’d probably like to drive a Maserati to work every day but I need a car that is affordable and will provide many years of dependable service. And yes, if we were all uncompromising driving purists we’d all be driving to work in Lotus Elises – but where would the child car-seats go? As it happens, driving a “sensible” car allows me a little extra money to fund my non daily-driver classic car and motorcycle projects where I can truly indulge my own enthusiast tendencies. And secondly, apart from being based on a false assumption – the whole attitude reeks of ridiculous pomposity because who set these people up as judge and jury of who or what is or is not a true gear-head? What I hear in many of these condescending comment is basically “You can only be a true gear-head is you like “A” and “B” and you are NOT a true gearhead of you like “C” and “D” – because, er…. I like “A” and “B” and I don’t like “C” and “D” and I’m a true gearhead so there!”. Like I said above – who made these people judge and jury? I’d like to think that car enthusiasts come in all shapes and sizes and flavors. The common theme that should unite us all is that we are fascinated by cars. As per my point 3 above – I think that TTAC is best when it strives to be inclusive. I’d hope that all commentors would bear this in mind before posting judgmental comments. Just a thought….
4. I would prefer that we keep politics out of the discussions where ever possible. I know that the current bailout fiasco is so entangled in politics that it is impossible to discuss it without straying somewhat into the realms of political rights and wrongs, but I am disappointed that the tenure of many comments descends too frequently into a partisan rant. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and TTAC is a great place to air and share a well thought-out opinion, but it is obvious that many posters are just presenting an entrenched political bias that adds nothing objective to the debate.
For example – it is quite clear that a lot of recent posters on the Chrysler bailout issues simply hate Barack Obama with a passion (it’s the name-calling and creative puns on his name that give it away guys…). It is a free country so you are obviously entitled to your opinion – but it is very clear from the posts that nothing he does will get a positive vote from you –and as such, there is little point in you actually commenting on what he does because you will inevitably condemn it. For what it is worth – I personally feel that a lot of serious mis-steps are being made right now – but I hope that I am forming that opinion based on the relative merits of what is being done rather than some unshakable pre-formed opinion of the person. To give you a slightly obscure (and Brit/Euro cultural) analogy… There is a long running annual European TV talent contest event called the Eurovision Song contest. It is very cheesy but a bit of an institution by now…. Each nation puts up an act and a song for the contest and all the other nations have to vote on the performance. Every year, the Greeks give the Turks zero and the Turks vote the Greeks zero (because they have a longstanding sovereignty dispute over Cyprus). It is totally petty and totally pointless (if you’ll excuse the pun). Their scoring adds nothing useful to the outcome of the event because it is pre-decided, and totally predictable. So maybe people should try and give the partisan politics a rest and try to be as objective as possible. I’m interested in well considered arguments about why the PTFOA’s strategy might or might not be right – but yet another “we’re all going to end up living in a communist banana rebublic” comment adds little to the debate for me?
Don’t change anything, RF. Keep up the good work.
TTAC needs more than just a few years to prove its stance. Like others have said, you are covering a doom and gloom period, hell, that began almost two years ago and will last a bit longer. You can’t/shouldn’t try to spin/slant the news like the DetN and Freep do.
In a couple years, when the bankruptcy (11 & 7) stuff is behind us, and newer product is being introduced by Ford and GM-China, it will be another amazing period to cover.
The first twenty years of my life I read the Free Press every morning. To make up for that, or at least offset it, I have to spend at least twenty years reading TTAC. So here we go…
Like most intelligent members of the B&B, I read everything editorialized here with a grain of salt–the anti-Detroit bias runs thick, but the actual news reported on is always accurate and detailed, so I keep that in mind.
The one guy who said they need more product reviews and less industry news is a fool–one can go anywhere on the web and find all sorts of biased reviews, unbiased reviews, in-the-middle reviews… All too often TTAC’s reviews are biased in this way as well (I love the HHR for example, and think the exterior styling is fantastic–yet the last review of it here called it bland, that it blended in with traffic–I can’t think of a normal, non-exotic car that blends into traffic any LESS than an HHR)… So I’d rather the site focus on what it really does best, inside info on the industry itself.
And it’s diction and writing style are just fine. People need to get a life.
Anti-Domestic hate? Sure. It’s because the Domestics turn out cars that for the most part, don’t appear to have made much of an effort to be excellent. There are probably dozens of reasons for the comparative poor quality of any Chrysler product, most GM products and some Ford products, but the reasons don’t really matter. It is what it is.
Some recent D3 cars show there is some sign of life (new Fusion, Mustang, G8, Malibu), but it really may be too little, too late – at least for GM and ChryCo.
The one guy who called me as a fool is a ding-a-ling. Scorch!
If TTAC wants broad appeal and to gain more readers via Google searches and the like, product reviews & discussion are far more likely to pull in casual searchers than deep analysis on business practices. I’m not saying TTAC should completely ignore industry news or even decrease coverage. In the interest of page views and enticing new readers, I believe that product focus will attract more eyeballs and remind us of how great and interesting cars are.
I’ve read the foregoing posts, and I don’t have much to add, so I’ll simply add my support for TTAC as it is. I’m not one for deep reflection – well, you know that if you read my posts on here – but I seriously appreciate the back-and-forth on these comment threads and the opportunity to learn that they provide. I don’t agree with all the viewpoints expressed, but I didn’t expect to.
I’ll pile on the lurv. TTAC is even more important now, and the content has been on an upswing.
I think the jew reference shows where you really are…To reach that deep into a bag of dirty tricks leaves you neck deep in the same excrement you claim to abhor. You write that it is a journalist’s job to question everything, assume everyone is lying/hiding the truth and something is wrong with every product. Yet, you are not willing to accept the same scrutiny. You delete content as you see fit to promote this site and assure your wage. Was this subject created by you to demonstrate to your masters how easily you manipulate the readership. Have you become what you claim to disdain with such vehemence?
Spare me the petulant girl reply.
Have you thought about not filtering the comments at all? That might be interesting for a week, and increase page views and such. See how it goes. Most of us grown ups know how to filter through the useless stuff.
Only real problem I have with this site is the annual TTAC Ten Worst awards. There needs to be a disclaimer noting that the voting process involved isn’t 100% democratic. I counted numerous reccomendations for the Prius (and a few other models I forget), but it never made the list. Not saying it deserved to be there, but I recall the beginning of the article for the Ten Worst began The votes are cast. I see no point in voting if votes are going to be cherry picked. In the spirit of transparency perhaps this year we could have a viewable online poll (with viewable real-time results) with every nominated vehicle represented?
There’s a fair amount of critizism for every site, because of the obvious difference in opinion that range from person to person. This being said TTAC does expect to receive coments attacking certain blogs, articles, etc. However, one of the major factors that attracted me to this site was the relevance, the wit, and the straight forward writing that TTAC presents. The styles, and the information presented in the submissions are educated, insightful, but at the same time entretaining (and I laugh when I read them which tend to make people around give me the, “what the f*** is wrong witht this guy, look).
That I beleive is what this site accomplishes more than anything: a fair and educated look at things but still able to tickle our funny bone at the same time.
Hey Robert,
I read TTAC because:
I like how you write
Your Britishisms – I grew up watching the once great British car industry disappear
I appreciate the work of your photo-editor and his/her wit – you perhaps?
Finally, despite some usage issues by your other writers, I appreciate the fresh, albeit doomsaying take on the car industry and the panache with which you recycle other people’s news.
Keep up the good work!!
The thing I dislike most about TTAC is the unrelenting negativity. There are times when I think the only regular contributors who actually like cars are Niedermeyer and Mehta (and Lieberman, when he was still a regular.) Unsurprisingly, I enjoy their contributions most.
That said, at least the negativity is predictable. It’s like reading C/D – I know the BMW is going to win, so I adjust my cognitive lenses to filter things appropriately.
Even so, it does get to be a bit much at time.
And dump the profanity already. Still not any more impressed by f-bombs than I was in the sixth grade. I think it’s unprofessional and makes it very hard for people to take you seriously.
What I wish TTAC had more of was features. Give me Piston Slap, give me Curbside Classics, give me a guy writing about the ’67 Hemi ‘Cuda he’s restoring, whatever, just give me stories about cars and the car culture. I’ll even write some of them if you want. There may not be the budget for original reporting, but original features are out there waiting in every car guy’s garage.
I wouldn’t say TTAC is being too clever for its own good, but I do have a couple of more general comments:
First off (and I think you and I have discussed this via email) I get that you think some of the colorful/jargony language adds “spice” to the articles. I don’t agree, but maybe that’s because my undergrad major was history and I’m used to reading dry/boring stuff. I get that it’s your site = your rules, so that’s the end of that, but what I will say, though, is if you’re going to use jargony terms like “bangle butt” and “B Segment” and “q-ship”, can you at least do your readers the favor of posting a glossary, ideally with a hyper-link from the term in question? That way I don’t have to try and figure out what those terms mean from context.
(I looked up “q-ship” on Google and got that it was a WW1 term for a warship disguised as a merchant vessel that was used to fight U-boats. Within the context of an automobile it sounds like the term refers to what street racers might call a “sleeper,” i.e. a vehicle with a powerful engine that outwardly appears to be an ordinary and un-modified car.)
My second suggestion – and this one is becoming quite annoying – is to stop reviewing certain vehicles for the sole purpose of writing some purportedly witty put-downs of the vehicle and/or their drivers. I cringe every time I see a review of a pickup or SUV because most of your reviewers don’t know shit about trucks, SUVs or 4x4s and, with a few exceptions, don’t even live in the parts of the country where these types of vehicles are commonly used. So instead of a review, we get an 800 word “automotive roast” that is of zero value to anybody except maybe the writer who can then pat himself on the back about how witty he really is.
If your reviews are truly “reviews” then they need to understand that slamming a full size pickup because it guzzles gas, is hard to park in Manhattan and doesn’t handle curves like a Porsche is entirely missing the point.
I might as well write a review of a Boxster and say that it’s an inferior vehicle because it doesn’t have enough ground clearance to handle a Level 4 trail, doesn’t have a low range, and can’t tow a 1,000lb trailer.
Read TTAC every day.
Tiger260 said it much better than I could. Martin also.
Especially the part about the rabid comments like “anyone who drives XXX is an idiot”.
Well. May as well out myself as the offender here. But my dear Robert, I hope you realize it’s all in jest, you make yourself LOL writing the posts and I make myself LOL writing and responding to these comments. I get a kick out of your prose and the strange abundance of farrago and the occasional lucid pellucid, I get words here I haven’t seen this side of an Umberto Eco translation.
And indeed I work for a British company, so I deal with whilst and amongst on a daily basis and it drives me a little batty. (Especially when my American subordinate whipped one of those out, yikes).
Finally I was actually curious — I recall you mentioning time you spent in UK and it occurred to me I didn’t know whether you were in fact American or British.
BTW – being from the Arkansas Ozark foothills I have a better claim to being a hillbilly than most.
Totally off topic..R.I.P Oshawa Truck….About an hour ago the last truck rolled off the line.
A sad day in the Shwa!
I second that Mikey; I owned a 2GC… truck for many years and I always believed that Canadian built Chev’s were superior to their American built brethren (apologies to the majority U.S. readership).
I’m not encountering as many “See you at Death Watch 23,344 asshole!” and “Fuck you you import-loving faggot” remarks.
Sorry. I’ve been a little busy lately.
TTAC’s style is both fine and unique, with a wry sense of humor from time to time.
If it decides to lurch into a trend of pen-pounding over a particular topic, I go read elsewhere, checking back a few days later to see if the trend has run its course.
Fortunately there have been more “fresh” things at TTAC lately, such as engineering or maintenance related topics – hopefully that trend will continue to grow.
I’d not feel right if I didn’t say something positive. Major kudos to TTAC for it’s recent articles on TurtleWax and Ford’s Sync. TTAC “gets it” when it comes to the fact that there’s more to auto enthusiasm than motors and suspensions. Noticed an increase in car reviews too. Keep up the good, nay, GREAT work!
I love all the articles about cars and car companies. News related to business related to cars… not so much. Sure it belongs on TTAC, but there’s just so much of it lately. I’d really like to hear more about other car companies during these times. This looks like a Detroit-based website right now.
For many of us, Chrysler and GM have long been minor players. It’s boring when those two companies make up 80% of the news. I do love the other 20%.
And while I do like political debates now and then, the proportion of posts that are basically political instead of car-related is on the high side.
1. FLAME! FLAME! FLAME! Whew, I feel so much better now.
2. I love TTAC, and have the hat to prove it. I do prefer the less-polemical writing.
3. Yes, extend the flaming ban to political asides. Those who want to throw non sequitur stinkbombs at Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Fillmore, etc. should post elsewhere.
4. Mikey, it is sad to see one of those engines of prosperity we call a factory shut down. I feel it every time I go by GM’s now-silent assembly plant in OKC.
5. What Tiger260 said.
6. Ravenchris: Were you writing in English? I ask only because I don’t understand what in hell you’re talking about.
7. The photos are terrific and witty.
I have a love hate relationship with TTAC. One one hand I HATE the single focus let the D3 die all while ignoring that not all imports should survive. I love the great vision from some of the regular readers. I love some of the great actual reporting that has taken place, while hating the truth :). Finally I hate that so many readers and editorials initially the true cost of this govt sponsored bankruptcy. IMO, things are going to get worse… much much worse.
You should run the submissions through a grammar and spell checker before uploading it, some common mistakes are being published.
keep it up. dont dumb it down a bit. you are the equivalent of a proper manual transmission in a sea of slushboxes. dont change a thing.
Robert,
I’m not what you would call a “car guy” but I read this site most days. Why? It is one of the few places on the web or in popular print the writing is much past 8th grade level.
-Wait; the flaming policy is off???
Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker and Tits!!!
Fuck you Robert, you import-loving faggot. ;P
Yes Mikey, I would believe you did not graduate from highschool.
Pshnarnininijjijian, you sir are a Dirty Communist! -It is regrettable you are so smart. Sometimes I wish you weren’t.
+1@Robstar: I find myself reading Baruth’s hoonery posts and my raised ire wishing at least for 1 dark millisecond that he were Alone, and the accident serious or fatal. -Just to take another yahoo off the roads who would laugh off exit-ramp-drifting an ~older Porsche in wet conditions with a passenger. -Or the whole Phaeton fiasco.
Otherwise:
A little negative. Needs more fun.
Not enough cheesecake photos of a scantily-clad Kathie Lee Gifford kissing Hoda Kotb on the hood of a Cadillac Cimarron.
Not Enough odd+disparate metaphors/overlays, ex:
Nardelli is clearly the 3rd douchebag of the apocalypse and hides his cloven goat-hooves and homunculus-bellybutton reasonably well for someone with his glaring narcissism.
Henderson was birthed whole from Waggoner’s rectum, as Athena from Zeus’ head;
-and pealed to the broad industry his clarion cry of prevarication, shit-heelage, and moustache-obsession uber alles.
-ie: more hotchickswithdouchebags or Davey G Johnson-type spice-simulacra added to the writing.
Could be funnier.
Not arch enough.
Arch is to bloggers what tuna is to Jessica Simpson Christina Aguilera; and fish dicks are to Kanye West.
—
+as always: some comment-moderation, depublishing and link/comment-baiting come off as petulant and capricious.
After reading all the comments, it seems to me most people focused primarily on the writing style rather than the normally prohibited practice of commenting on TTACs obvious, and often blatant, anti-Big 2.8, anti-conservative, anti-SUV, anti-V8, anti-American styled, anti-any fullsize vehicle, pro-liberal, pro-environmentalist, bias.
While I believe firmly that TTAC has EVERY RIGHT to their viewpoint, wrong tho it may be, I just despise any website that uses its “no flaming” policy to eliminate posts that challenge or disagree with the party line. Just like communist China does with their thought police…
I have no problem with eliminating posts such as the “Fuck you, you import loving faggot”… but when a post is deleted just because the author is pointing out an obvious bias and disagreeing with it, then you’ve crossed the line from “no flaming” and gone to “no disagreeing with the TTAC party positions”… and that’s just wrong.
There’s a reason, an extremely good reason, why the U.S. Constitution has the 1st Ammendment. Not so that “Fuck you, you import loving faggot” has to be tolerated (like the ACLU would argue), but so that people with differences of beliefsopinion couldn’t be punished and FORCIBLY SHUT UP. Which is what deleting posts that point out and disagree with TTACs political positions does.
But, with all that said, this IS your website and you can run it like some little tin cup communist dictator if you want to. :) That’s not the American way, but…
A bit heavy snark and strange prose, but I’m still around. It’s hard to get a contrarian view of the auto industry anywhere else.
Yes, it’s perpetual doom-and-gloom in here, but that’s just the way it is these days. In happier times I’m sure TTAC would be rambling about gear knob diameters and windshield wiper lengths.
@Martin Albright:
“(I looked up “q-ship” on Google and got that it was a WW1 term for a warship disguised as a merchant vessel that was used to fight U-boats. Within the context of an automobile it sounds like the term refers to what street racers might call a “sleeper,” i.e. a vehicle with a powerful engine that outwardly appears to be an ordinary and un-modified car.)”
And Here’s the glossary, courtesy of Wikipedia:
“A sleeper (US English) or Q-car (British English) is a car that has high performance and an unassuming exterior. Sleeper cars are termed such because their exterior looks little or no different from a standard or economy-class car (or in some cases worse due to seeming neglect on the owner’s part), but internally they are modified to perform at higher performance levels. The American term possibly comes from how an aggressive animal can seem gentle or perhaps friendly until awoken, while the British term derives from the Q-ships used by the Royal Navy.
The earliest known reference to the term ‘Q-car’ is in the February 1963 edition of Motor Sport magazine (published in the UK since 1924). The editor, Billy Boddy, said of the Lotus Cortina ~ “…the modifications carried out by Lotus have turned it in to a ‘Q’ car par excellence…”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q-car
3. Yes, extend the flaming ban to political asides. Those who want to throw non sequitur stinkbombs at Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Fillmore, etc. should post elsewhere.
Or someone could create thetruthaboutpolitics.com ?
Posted earlier by someone somewhere… “Was this subject created by you to demonstrate to your masters how easily you manipulate the readership. Have you become what you claim to disdain with such vehemence?
Spare me the petulant girl reply.”
Hmmm…. Me thinks the Autoextremist has finally come out to play on “Tictac.com”.
I started reading TTAC again when I saw Robert Farago on Autoline TV taking on the once and former great Autoextremist (and now Autolamist).
Robert Farago has a pretty adversarial position, and I don’t always agree, but it is principled. Gotta respect that. Especially since Detroit-think is rooted in fond memories of 40 years ago rather than the global auto industry that is now coming forth.
P.S. I never liked TTAC because one of your douche-y writers who plugs his own website too much, and did it so often at another auto blog that the community drove him away.
Good about TTAC:
1) Posters. Yes, even though some articles are good, but they are not the reason I am here. It’s about the relatively smart posters and the interactions.
Bad about TTAC:
1) Definition of “flaming” is vague. I once suggested that all reviews should used the same score system (i.e. why should a Lamborghini get 5 stars while a truck lost a star due to high fuel consumption?). I regard my post to be a constructive suggestion. Yet, it’s deleted. You are too defensive here.
2) No “quote” functionality for posting.
3) Too obsessed with plastic. Why is hard beige plastic a bad thing in a sub $20k car? Other than the steering wheel or shifter, the only time you would touch that plastic is when your car crashes and you didn’t wear a seat belt.
4) Too obsessed with manual transmission. With 90% of the cars, 90% of the drivers would drive better with automatics. In a couple decades, 100% of the drivers would do better with 100% of the cars with automatics. Manual transmission is just a 20th century torque matching device that gets obsolete in the 21st century.
5) Too obsessed with “appliance”. Yes, a Camry is an appliance. But so is any other car. A Toyota is just like a Panasonic. A Hyundai is just like a Samsung. A Porsche is just like a Bosch.
+1 Wolven!
Many times, whenever Fiat or some French maker is mentioned, offensive, derogatory remarks come up. Why is that not flaming?
And when people criticize Toyonda or any German product, many times the comment is promptly deleted and the poster warned. Why?
I’m a car-lover. But one with tastes that stray from the majority. So, since flaming is off, I think all German cars are bs. VW in the lower end is totally outclassed as are the others at the top. Give me an Alfa, Volvo, Jag. Even an Infinity or maybe Acura (no Lexus tks.). Heck even a Ford Mondeo or Renault Laguna, or Citroen C6 are finer. To each his own.
And I think Toyota-Honda cars are soulless clunks of plastic.Who cares if nothing ever breaks (but when they do, and they always do, they break your wallet)??? I’ll take a Fiat, Renault, Ford, Nissan (Irealize it’s Jap, but it’s the only one I’d consider) anyday. Maybe even a Hyundai.
Though rare, I’m sure I’m not the only one w/ such tastes. Give us “alternative-shoppers” some breathing room.
Rant over.
Even though I’m guilty of this, extend the flaming ban to politics. I love this place, but on a bad day the comment threads can turn into a cross between Townhall.com and DailyKos. On wheels.
3. Yes, extend the flaming ban to political asides. Those who want to throw non sequitur stinkbombs at Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Fillmore, etc. should post elsewhere.
—————————————
Bush and Obama has given and will give GM/Chrysler more than $100B.
Truth is generally understood as complete facts. A fact may not be the truth, if it’s not complete.
How can you ever understand the truth about cars, while ignoring that $100B? If you ignore it, then your scope is very limit and it’s not truth any more.
So, it’s not at all off topic to discuss about the policies of Bush and Obama. They brought it to themselves by making those decisions. Reagan and Clinton are innocent bystanders though.
“when people criticize Toyonda or any German product, many times the comment is promptly deleted and the poster warned”
I gotta stick up for TTAC on this one, I’ve taken big shits all over Toyota in the comments and not once have my remarks been deleted. (or have they? I assume I’d get at least an email)
To those who object to the appliance bashing…it’s not that Toyota makes regular, mainstream cars, it’s that they don’t make them well compared to their peers. Build quality and reliability are good I’ll concede, but there’s no excuse for their product to consistently handle worse (enjoyment wise) than others without necessarily delivering a better ride by other standards. That’s the problem. Honda, Nisaan and Mazda make appliances too and yet no one is jumping up and down about the Accord, Altima or 6. Ask yourself why that may be, then test drive.
Good work, I love TTAC as it is, it’s about the only decent automotive website out there that caters to people with a brain!
WSN–
Related to cars, yeah, but when people start ranting about how Obama is a Fascist who will enslave us all….well…
Same if they started ranting about how Bush is plotting with Halliburton to take over the world or whatever.
At least calling people Nazis, Communists, or Fascists should be banned. It’s just a slightly more sophisticated, political version of “You’re an import loving faggot”.
I used to read every day, but the libertarian/right-wing viewpoint of nearly every author and commentator here makes it pretty unpalatable to read more than once in awhile now. I actually don’t care what anyone’s political point of view is–I have car buddies who I suspect think Hitler was a bit of a lightweight and Gordon Liddy is center left–but I can still BS with them about cars and everyone has a good time. I don’t want to read about politics in my “car porn,” there are plenty of outlets for it in the real world.
Surprise, surprise, there are those of us who are “pinko commies” who also car enthusiasts. Politics adds nothing to the site, it’s just one big circle jerk. Some of us object to being covered in spunk.
The Economist used to have an annual article highlighting most(ly) ignorant/PC commentary submitted called; “Why do we only get these letters from America.”
I’m sure some similar packaging of the aforementioned culled commentary would entertaining as well.
At least calling people Nazis, Communists, or Fascists should be banned.
It depends. If you’re talking about Hitler, you could call him a Nazi. Josef Stalin really was a Commie, and Francisco Franco was one hell of a Fascist.
But they’ve been unemployed for awhile, and to my knowledge, they don’t post here (although you never know, I’ve heard that Hitler really had a thing for pets and his Blackberry.) So yeah, it’s probably best that less time be spent here talking about them.
If this article was to help you feel good…I`m sorry for you.
oldyak
@Maxwelton: I’m a good old-fashioned communist, so you should be in good company. All the conflicts on this earth, is about how the wealth are to be spread among the people. Though, I’m more of a provocateur than being dogmatic. What I’m getting at, is that at the end of the day, politics really doesn’t matter at TTAC. I’d rather swing a couple of beers with you guys than spend my time with the best people on earth. And politics aside, passion for cars, and passion for a well managed industry is what binds us all together. Truth be told, no holds barred…
Pch–
I wasn’t talking about self-described Nazis and Commies, I mean calling mainstream domestic politicians Nazis/Communists.
Wow, one snarky comment from me about Robert Farago’s Britishisms leads to 115 internecine comments about Bush, Obama, Nazis, and communists, and more cusswords than I’ve run across since I was in the navy. For TTAC’s sake, I hope you guys are clicking on the ad banners!
I went through my magazines once to find room for cutbacks and the overwhelming evidence for my favourites always came down to the same thing… every one of them that I deemed a favourite was independent, with a clear editorial voice. I gave up all the rest and was never happier.
The same with blogs. I want an opinion. Not one that I agree with, but one that is clear, not a milquetoast wannabe that is trying to be all things to all people and not rile any potential ad bucks. Sound familiar?
So, no, I don’t want to see changes.
BTW, for those criticizing the tone of the site, remember all these posters are self selecting. If you don’t like the sound of something, sound off. Sitting on the sidelines fuming or going away in a huff is pointless.
I’ve read the comments above and am impressed with the quality of the readership at this site. Overall, people don’t post slanderous, irrationally charged statements about other posters (if they’re edited out, I approve).
I enjoy the cultural and historical references. My curiosity drives me to learn their meanings before returning to finish the article.
The writing style and underlying wit of this site provide great entertainment value, and often bring a smile to my face. I refrain from laughing out loud so as to avoid having to explain to my wife the source of the humor. The level of humor on this site is beyond my ability to explain, and if I tried, the wit would be lost in the explanation.
There aren’t many positive statements about the American name automobile manufacturers. A decade ago I had accrued about $5,000 in rebates and credit card points toward the purchase of any General Motors vehicle. I searched the entire line with serious effort to use my savings. Unfortunately, nothing proved exciting enough to purchase. I ended up with a German named vehicle. I can understand the lack of enthusiasm for Motown. I can also understand the rage of tax payers whose dollars are donated to businesses that swallow the cash and ask for more.
Of equal intrigue are the photos that accompany each article. On rare occasions some are offended. Whilst (sic) it didn’t bother me to see a photo of Hitler, the father of the car of the people, I can understand why some were offended.
Yes, there is an air of arrogance in some articles, but without that, the blog would lose its edginess. To me, it’s a style, not just an attitude.
Thanks for the entertainment and info.
DEZ
Why not lighten the mood by adding features that are wacky, silly, off-the-wall? Brainstorm: “Craigslist beater ad of the day”. Scan the used car posts for your municipality, filtering them so you only see the sub-$1000 listings. You should be able to find a real knee-slapper within a matter of minutes. Post ’em here, sit back, and let the hilarity roll!
“I used to read every day, but the libertarian/right-wing viewpoint of nearly every author and commentator here makes it pretty unpalatable to read more than once in awhile now.”
I’ve always considered myself a conservative Democrat (down South), a moderate Republican (up North), and generally apolitical when it comes to actually solving problems.
I care about balanced budgets, compulsory education, constitutional rights, and…. cars.
Does that make me a right winger? That would be ironic. I was labeled a liberal in my MBA program and a Republican in my M.Ed. program.
Guess you can’t win sometimes.
Thanks for the feedback. Really. I’ve read every comment, and take all of your concerns seriously.
I’ll respond here to a few general themes. If anyone wants to discuss this directly with me, please email: robertfarago1@gmail.com.
Politics –
The issue of whether or not TTAC should engage in or stimulate political debate arose from blogging Day One. I reported a story about Maine’s refusal to go along with the fed’s “real ID” law, a decision which allowed illegal aliens to obtain ME driver’s licenses. Readers rebelled at my politics. But more importantly, they were not happy with the general idea of politics on a car blog.
Frank and I discussed the issue, and put it to the nascent Best and Brightest. The consensus: car blogs are no place for politics. So we reigned-in our political horns and tried to keep it four-wheeled real. And then, well, we gradually backslid. And I guess our B&B got used to it.
No surprise there. The automotive industry is inextricably woven into the political sphere—from safety and tailpipe regulations to, now, nearasdammit $100b in federal subsidies. These days, even Autoblog covers the nexus of politics and the car industry.
The problem with stimulating political debate is that the commentators’ responses can be– OK ARE highly partisan. Personally, I no longer possess patience for politics from the left OR the right. While my views are basically conservative, pro-free market, I’ve come to the inescapable conclusion that all politicians are weasels, squids and parasites. Bill O’Reilly is just as much of a blowhard as Keith Oberman. Same diff.
I too get tired of the political posturing found in our comments section. But it is not my place to intervene, at least not on that level. There may be more heat than light in these “discussions,” but I believe it is better to light-up a car forum with sloganeering than to curse the darkness of an empty, obsequious mainstream media. Or something like that.
So yes, there will be more interminable debates about government control vs. free markets, Obama vs. liberty, big vs. small government, global warming vs. junk science, etc. It may be template stuff, and stray from the topic of cars like a bitch in heat slipping its leash, but it’s become part of TTAC’s rich–and sometimes not so rich—tapestry.
Sorry. Metaphors. Must. Control. Metaphors.
Flaming –
I think it’s a good time to repeat a couple of points about TTAC’s anti-flaming policy.
First of all, I don’t need Peter DeLorenzo to tell me that our anti-flaming policy is fundamentally hypocritical. It’s the truth. TTAC flames the media (and everyone else) without mercy. Yet I ruthlessly delete comments that criticize this site.
I fully and freely admit that this policy is patently unfair.
There is only one reason for this contradictory, otherwise insupportable policy: to create space for sensible discussions about the content of a post, rather than TTAC.
In other words, during the last five years or so, I’ve found that if I allow commentators to flame the site, EVERY comment section become about the site. The discussion generates into name calling. Every single time.
So I delete anti-TTAC comments and email their author asking them to discuss their objections to our editorial stance or style with me in private.
I also delete anti-author comments. On the face of it, this is equally indefensible. Why should a reviewer/editorialist be shielded from criticism of their work, no matter how harsh?
Same answer. Over the years, I’ve seen HUNDREDS of comments accusing a TTAC author of being anti-thisor pro-that automaker. In the main, these have been extremely nasty attacks. And they always take the comments off track. So I delete those comments as well.
Here’s the main problem, which leads to this moral dissonance: TTAC disrespects everyone and everying (except our Best and Brightest). Yet I want the comments section to be a place where commentators engage in passionate yet respectful debate.
Jalopnik creator Michael Spinelli put it best when he called Autoblog “a picnic over a sewer.” I never wanted TTAC to be that. At the same time, Spinelli said that TTAC was the exact opposite of most sites, where the posts were nuts and the comments sane.
Anger
The implementation of our “one rule for us, one rule for you” anti-flaming policy creates no small amount of entirely understandable anger. And boy, do I feel it here. Suffice it to say (well for me), I appreciate the passion with which my/our critics attack TTAC’s “bias.” Seriously. You have to care very deeply indeed about something to be that angry—which is not something you could say about most people. Respect.
Negativity
As I said in my post, I’ve reconciled myself to TTAC’s endlessly cynical perspective. God knows there’s plenty to be cynical about these days, as Detroit heads for the final countdown (sorry for putting that synth riff in your head). But I have resolved to balance that negative perspective on the foibles of the car industry with a negative perspective on cars, videogames, Turtle Wax, etc.
Meanwhile, I want to assure you that ALL of us at TTAC love cars. Reference above: if we didn’t care so much we wouldn’t be so god damn nasty.
Showcasing the “Best of the Worst of Flaming”
NEVER going to happen. TTAC will insult anything that moves–or stands still too long—but we will NEVER insult our readers, no matter how ugly or bone-headed they may be. We wouldn’t exist without our readers, and we cherish every single one. Period.
Wise response Mr. Farago. As always, though you are at times “difficult “, you state your case with clarity, passion and reason. Can’t ask for more.
Kudos to you and the site.
I’m not a car guy at all. I don’t even know how to drive, and if I ever purchase a car, it’ll be one of those considered boring as hell by everyone here.
I read TTAC daily for the writing and for the industry analysis. Both aim high, both miss the mark on occasion, and both could scarcely be more informative and entertaining.
I come here to get a breath of air outside the Detroit bubble. The atmosphere is often a bit, um, acidic…. But it’s also entertaining, else I’d have lost interest by now.
I’m getting used to the unrelenting criticism of the Detroit carmakers (kinda don’t have a choice). But the one thing that still bugs me is the argument that generally goes “these business are in some bad shape, the leaders must be idiots”. You don’t get to be in a position of leadership at any public company by being an idiot. You just don’t. There is more to these stories, and going a little deeper tends to keep my interest (i spend way more time at Ward’s and at Autoline Detroit than I do here). Some of the commentators here try to dig deeper (having the attorneys commenting on the bankruptcy was/is quite interesting). But most don’t. And that’s ok. It’s still a fun place to cruise through.
Robert, I come on this site every night and read every page, the kind of member you like, mega page views. I even click on a few ads here and there, hoping to generate some income for you. I enjoy it all, not just your stuff, but all your writers and the B & B’s comments as well, agree or not. I must admit that I do have to make a side trip to dictionary.com every once in a while, but thats entertaining too. Keep up the great work.
Well, as far as writing style is concerned, the appropriate comparison is not Walter Winchell, but H.L. Mencken. No higher praise have I to offer.
Snark and negativity is why I read TTAC every day [except, of course, on those days when I don’t]. And the selection of pictures is sometimes worth more than anything else on the site [there was one of a Chrysler plant on fire which was just superb, because of the slogan on the front].
I understand RF’s take on not censoring political rants, but I think there is a difference between saying “I am disturbed by what Obama is doing, and think it is harmful because ….” and “Oh Noes! Obama is leading us right into a communist dictatorship. I would welcome the second sort of post being Terminated With Extreme Prejudice.
So TTAC’s not perfect — what is? It is certainly head and shoulders above any other automotive commentary I have seen on the InterWeb, and I am grateful that Mr. Farago and his merry band of automotive pranksters keep chuckling right along.
I am getting bored with all the doom and gloom. But that is the times we are in. Paul Niedemier and Steve the used car guy are the main attraction for me. I’m not a mainstream car guy. I have never bought a new car and I fix my own cars. My daily drivers are a pair of 88 BmW 529es. . So new car articles dont do anything for me. The political banter is fine. I think both parties should be ashamed of themselves for their complicity in the ruination of the greatest country that ever was.
Sure, it is biased. It is extremist. But it is entertaining.
For the same reason I go to see a movie, read a book, or watch TV, I come here to be entertained (more than informed). Sorry.
It can get a bit repetitive though, at times.
The video podcast with the 3 other “Detroit” car guys was not so good. Too pushy IMHO. Made me cringe. Sometimes it is okay to dial it back a bit and just talk the issues instead of who is right and who is wrong.
The anti flaming rule is the best. Most others sites turn into sickening name calling. Keep,it up.
Robert,
In respect to calling bullshit on the policy….
By your own admission, the flaming policy here is extremely strict. I’ve been warned for simply asking the question if you’d be willing to recant if GM or Chrysler didn’t make it. No mean words, no direct attack. You just didn’t want to answer the question (which is now moot, you were right, bravo for you). But if your beloved followers here flame others who are against the majority opinion, well, those posts seem to hang around. Your website…you be the boss. I actually enjoy it here and will happily go with the rules…I could certainly go somewhere else.
As for calling myself “PRthug,” I wear that label proudly having been called that by an environmentalist.
I like TTAC. It’s written much better than the rest of the automotive websites I regularly read. And I like that the comments aren’t incredibly stupid, like on other blogs, though I guess that entirely has to do with the moderation of comments.
Which makes it ironic that the only comment I’ve ever left is this one, and it’s entirely because of the suspension of no-flaming, just for this post.
The only thing I dislike is when an editorial is posted consisting entirely of the author being a self-important douchebag. I’m not talking about ALL the editorials; a good majority of them are informative and intriguing. But there are just some that piss me off. One that comes to mind recently is the one about how the author acts like a passive aggressive little pussy if anyone didn’t drive like he wanted them to drive. If I didn’t know better, I’d think you were just trolling the readers to get a rise out of them. No one can be that much of an asshole, can they? And TTAC can’t be that filled with assholes that they’d agree with him, would they? Things like that are the entire reason I stopped reading other blogs: posts just became way too self serving and full of asshattery.
But if TTAC keeps its standards up (with the asshat posts kept to a minimum), I want to keep reading it.
Robert,
I guess I just don’t understand why so many readers think there is an anti-domestic bias. The reviews section is CHOCK FULL of four and five star reviews of Ford and GM products. Are they upset because every single model doesn’t get rave reviews? I mean, this isn’t Motor Trend. I currently drive a Mercury, and have owned Chevy(2), GMC, Toyota(2), Honda, Mazda, Subaru, Pontiac, and Ford. Good and bad vehicles come from many countries and companies, and your reviews reflect that. And you don’t need collegiate level reading comprehension to figure that out, the big red stars at the bottom of the reviews aren’t too cryptic.
And what about all the Toyota bashing? (As reliable but dull transportation appliances, true by the way, most boring vehicles I’ve owned were the two Toyotas.) Where are the angry emotional mobs defending Toyota’s besmirched honor?
So, for example, are we anti-Ford or anti-American if we don’t love each and every Ford product? I like my Mercury Mariner, and I’m fond of rented Mustang convertibles, and I lust after the Lincoln Mark 9 and Mark X prototypes that will never see production. But am I anti-Ford just because I also think the Focus is remarkably unremarkable, and the new Lincolns that DO go into production with the cow-catcher grilles are ugly?
Keep doing what you’re doing. The haters must want you to turn this into Motor Trend.
P.S.: Maybe it’s the editorials they hate. Oh well, the real meat is the reviews anyway. And recently I see four and five stars for the G8, several Mustangs, F250, Navigator, CTS, Corvette, Malibu, Tahoe Hybrid, hell even a couple Mopar products.
As a Canadian – and I have advanced this view to other Canucks, who remain sceptical – we were not aware that there were so many literate and numerate Americans. We thought you were all drooling retards who couldn’t find Iraq on a labelled map but Christ, some of you guys really impress me. I am often amazed at the level of world knowledge expressed by the B & B – e.g. indepth analysis of the Dresden bombing, or bankruptcy law, that I had not gained from extensive personal reading and discussion. At a different range of the scale, Mikey from Ontario offers informative insider knowledge, high school grad or not.
I’m not encountering as many “See you at Death Watch 23,344 asshole!” … remarks.
That’s because you kept deleting them, although I would like to point out that I never spoke with such a slanderous tone. :p I would pick a number fifty or so posts into the future, fully certain that no matter what happens to the company in question (and no matter how soon it would come about) the Death Watch series about it would swell to said number. The number I was on most recently was 250, and I was just as right about that as you were about the inevitability of a GM filing (although I would claim that the filing has come about for different reasons).
That said, a move from a five-star rating scale to a ten-star scale would be an excellent idea in my book; so much more of the lovely subtlety inherent in weighing the merits of an automobile would be reflected in the end result that way. I would also consider it an improvement to tone down the six-foot-thick layer of editorialising slathered on top of every single news post. At the moment, the “news” posts are more like miniature editorials than actual news posts. Some of the usual snark and wit is perfectly welcome (everyone has their spin, and TTAC is on the automotive-news map for it), but the sheer amount you use for a “news” post simply does a disservice to the “news” label.
Beyond that, don’t change a thing. I don’t agree with much of the editorials and occasional car reviews printed here, but intellectual opposition sharpens the tongue and strengthens the mind.
First – keep up the good work.
TTAC has interesting news items, knowledgeable readers, and a point of view.
If its focus remains on cars, TTAC will continue to thrive.
TTAC is rightly opposed to cars-as-appliances. OK, so explore *what* makes a car an anti-appliance.
To use a term Mr. Karesh is fond of, there’s a lot of tacit knowledge among TTAC’s writers and the Best and Brightest about what makes a car fun to drive. Put that tacit knowldege to work: What are those fun factors? Which cars (present and past) have those qualities?
Suggestion:
– Have Piston Slap / Mr. Lang post an Auto Maintenance 101 item (with link on TTAC front page) – handy for the growing number of drivers who need to keep their current car running for the indefinite future.
Thanks.
TTAC must be great, RFs been on TV twice!
The anti-domestic bias is more from the commenters than the writers.
I do think RF has an impossible dream of the US auto industry being 100 or so coach builders building perfect cars for exuberant funds. He’s biased for wealthy people.
davey49
Huh?
RF-
I’d like to get a ruling on posting corrections (spelling, malapropisms, missing punctuation, grammar) in the comments of a particular thread.
For me it’s faster to offer a correction in a thread than to email it, and it has the added benefit of being pre-linked to the piece that needs correction
What say you, email or comment?
TC
The Comedian:
Email is best: it’s less embarrassing; and I don’t have to email you to explain that I deleted your comment so I don’t look like an ass.
robertfarago1@gmail.com
a move from a five-star rating scale to a ten-star scale would be an excellent idea in my book
My personal star scale goes to eleven.
Captain Tungsten :
May 14th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
But the one thing that still bugs me is the argument that generally goes “these business are in some bad shape, the leaders must be idiots”. You don’t get to be in a position of leadership at any public company by being an idiot.
——————————————-
They are geniuses of climbing the cooperate ladder, but idiots of actual management.
Just like Mozart is a genius in music, but an idiot at managing his own life.
One small suggestion I haven’t seen yet. When you retract a post, don’t delete it. Leave it up with an update saying retracted or corrected. I like that approach better – blogs that are willing to keep their footprint out there and admit why they were wrong.
A bit less vulgarity would be nice – I rarely see a valid use of the F-bomb in a post here. But maybe that’s just me.