A member of our TTAC faithful brought this Car and Driver BM photoshop scandal to our attention in a comment posted under a recent Ask the Best and Brightest. I let it go unremarked at the time. But now that Autoblog has picked-up the Car and Driver cudgel and beat the mag over the head with it, the story has officially mainstreamed (not to verbize or anything). Whatever credibility and good will the Alterman regime has generated at Car and Driver just disappeared in a puff of imaginary tire smoke. Imagine blaming the writer for browbeating the art department into faking a drag race to mislead the reader. And then calling deceived readers idiots. As someone who grew-up devouring Car and Driver, this is the final straw. Enjoy the slide boys. There’s no coming back.
John Phillips became so attached to the BMW X6M that it – appropriately enough – triggered many irrational responses. One of these was his insistence that we photoshop the BMW beating the clearly superior Chevy Nova. Any attempt to dissuade him – by telling him, for instance, that only an idiot would believe a BMW SUV could beat a purpose-built drag car – just resulted in heated calls to the suicide hotline and even more foaming at the mouth than usual.
What?!
A Car and Driver writer with a major hard-on for a BMW?!
Surely you jest!!!
Anyone who read the article – and I did – should have found it to be satirical. No, they shouldn’t have photoshopped the picture, but I’d say it falls in the category of irreverence for irreverence’s sake.
By the way, on the subject of journalistic ethics, did TTAC correct the story about GMC raising prices to include the reason the prices went up?
Well I don’t know the whole story here, but I read that issue of C&D, and if the only “issue” is the above photo, this reader never once took that to mean the X6 M was beating the Nova… It was a tongue-in-cheek illustration in line with the way the whole article was written.
Again, I don’t know if there is more to this story, but if all it is is this photo, then it’s certainly Much Ado About Nothing — a fabricated “scandal”.
Car and Drivel has been dead for at least 10 years… nothing to see here… move along…
Oh come on, the entire thing was satirical. Perhaps satire is lost upon the owner of the Nova.
I know you have a quota Robert, but this is a bit much.
Is this the same Car & Driver that was once a respected car magazine?
If it was satirical, a simple snarky caption would have sufficed. (“As if,” for example.) But this photo was presented without any disclaimer. Car and Driver’s po-faced semi-retraction tells you all you need to know on that score.
Perhaps the joke would be clearer if you linked to the rest of the images from the story…..
Like the one of the farmer pulling the ‘off-road’ BMW out of the mildest of grassy divots.
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/reviews/car/09q3/2010_bmw_x6_m_-road_test/gallery/1992_dodge_power_ram_250_and_2010_bmw_x6_m_photo_57/2822934-1-eng-US/image_cd_gallery.jpg
This is a cheap shot that’s kind of disappointing from TTAC. It’s been quite a while since the TTAC showed any sense of humor (other than monumental snark, of course) and this kind of pissy sniping isn’t improving the blog. Get a life and let John Phillips have some fun, even if you can’t.
Please, dial back the hate for Farago. He’s a short timer here.
I took it in the same vein as Nat Lamp’s “If Ted Kennedy had been driving a VW, he’d be president” ad. On the other hand, THAT was funny. The C/D article was simply ridiculous, sort of like the concept of a BMW SUV.
+1 Lokkii
RF – Again, it really feels like you’re mailing it in at the end here. Too bad.
Re CD – Perhaps since the 25 paid subscribers they have left have all been reading the mag for 40 years, they feel like they can make inside jokes without a full explanation. Just sayin’….
I don’t mind the photochop. It looks to me like the Bimmer is a great SUV made to race pretty fast. Not as fast as the Nova, but it still makes a point. A fast Suv being able to take on some of the best from the past.
I respect TTAC’s opinion, but I don’t share the same point of view. On the other hand C and D, seems to have not backed up their enthusiasm inspired photo chop and instead went compliant about the complaints. A bit inconsistent with their vision.
Yeah… its a joke. Not a funny one, but a joke indeed. Even the apology is a joke, aimed at those who took that OBVIOUSLY fake photo seriously.
RF, it was your writing that attracted me to this site when I joined several months back. It disappoints me when you run with stuff like this.
I’m glad people are realizing hwat I’ve said all along: Car and Driver is paid off.
I don’t mind the photoshop…it’s the writer I find rather useless. Philips isn’t funny and he isn’t providing useful information about cars…so unless he shows up at the valet stand this Friday night to park my car, I now have absolutely no use for him.
And bringing Davis back? First, I didn’t know he was still alive. Second – have you read his columns since he’s been back at C/D? In one he declares his previous gen Escalade the finest vehicle he has ever owned. Ummm, okay. I guess I’ll chalk that up to…senility? (Hmmmm…on second thought, maybe he’s NOT alive…)
It’s almost (but not quite) as bad as reading Jean Jennings pine about @#$%& Bob Lutz in Motor Trend. I have ZERO respect for anything these two hacks might have ever accomplished.
C/D is a sad shadow of its former self. It’s only the free subscription that keeps it in my bathroom (I haven’t paid for one in 4 years – they give these away now – ostensibly to keep circulation up to prop up their ad rates).
I’m sorry, did someone get upset because they took a John Phillips article seriously?
What’s next, a racial discrimination suit against Jonathan Swift?
Davis was underwhelming in Automobile. It seemed he mostly wrote about who he hobnobbed with, and his dull voyages. He once wrote a review of a Lexus IS-whatever-it-was, and that was terrific. The guy clearly had talent. But that was the only time in the past decade that I enjoyed something he wrote.
@DearS
My Accord can take on some of the best from the past. Maybe that Chevy II can drag, but if you were to throw handling into the mix of challenges, it would suffer. Still, it’s got a great roofline. (I mean it, I’m not being sarcastic.)
This C&D article rubbed me the wrong way also, but it wasn’t the whole Photoshop issue. I was (once again) getting tired of their BMW worship even more when they decided that this was the time to parade a vehicle that shouldn’t exist paired with the waste of an “M” badge on it. There have been other examples of speed-demon SUV/CUVs out there – the Grand Cherokee SRT-8 and Range Rover Sport Supercharged come to mind, but C&D didn’t touch them with a ten foot pole…but the BMW Aztek comes out and, boom, time to waste paper and ink and dragstrip time.
Even this month’s “loss” to Audi is sugar coated with tons of love and praise for a now aging vehicle. I know BMW makes a good driver’s car, but there are still better cars out there but you wouldn’t know it if someone only reads C&D.
There is precisely one reason left to read ANY car magazine.
That reason is Peter Egan, at R&T.
You can read Egan’s column online.
Or at the drugstore.
I couldn’t tell that the picture was photoshopped. I actually thought they raced the SAC against the Nova, which had stalled at launch…
I used to LOVE CD, but every month, month after month, it gets worse. And thinner to boot. The “comedy” aspect of it, that once left me gasping for air, now strikes me as forced.
And bringing back DED? WTF.
I read Automobile back in high school, when it debuted. My buddy and I thought we were cool, reading GQ and Automobile. Then it went down hill, and about a decade and a half later, I let my subscription expire. I’m back, only because of a good deal and some open reading time. But I save Automobile for last.
R&T? Whoever said the only reason to read a car magazine is because of Egan, hit it spot on. That at least applies to why I subscribe to R&T. I save Egan’s stuff for when I can really enjoy it. Whether or not I read the rest of the magazine, is a toss up.
Motor Trend broke my cherry, back in the 70’s. Followed closely by R&T, because of the cool cutaway pictures (I was just learning to read), and then CD and Autoweek. I used to be the biggest critic of Motor Trend, back in the late 90’s. I’m not sure what they were doing, but it wasn’t good. But more than anyone, I feel Motor Trend came into its own, and really provides the best “Bang for The Buck.” The tests are good, and so are the editorials. And more than anything, I think they have the best content.
As a fan of all the car mags (including Hot Rod and Car Craft), I’d like to see them all bring it back. But in these days of online content, I’m not sure it will happen.
Makes me a bit sad.
Robert Farago :
October 5th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
If it was satirical, a simple snarky caption would have sufficed. (”As if,” for example.) But this photo was presented without any disclaimer. Car and Driver’s po-faced semi-retraction tells you all you need to know on that score.
Oh, come on. They’ve been doing snarky retorts for 40 years now in the letters to the editor column. Since when did anyone associated with TTAC have a problem with snarky?
By the way, on the subject of retractions and journalistic integrity, your story on GMC price increases was inaccurate and didn’t tell the whole story. Has that been retracted or corrected?
yep that’s not the brightest picture to show that car eh?
I can’t stand John Phillips. I am also glad they got rid of Martin Padgett.
theflyersfan :
October 5th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
This C&D article rubbed me the wrong way also, but it wasn’t the whole Photoshop issue. I was (once again) getting tired of their BMW worship even more when they decided that this was the time to parade a vehicle that shouldn’t exist paired with the waste of an “M” badge on it. There have been other examples of speed-demon SUV/CUVs out there – the Grand Cherokee SRT-8 and Range Rover Sport Supercharged come to mind, but C&D didn’t touch them with a ten foot pole…but the BMW Aztek comes out and, boom, time to waste paper and ink and dragstrip time.
Even this month’s “loss” to Audi is sugar coated with tons of love and praise for a now aging vehicle. I know BMW makes a good driver’s car, but there are still better cars out there but you wouldn’t know it if someone only reads C&D.
I do read C/D pretty regularly, and I don’t see BMWs winning every comparision test, unless it’s the 3-series. If you can tell me why it deserves to lose, then OK, let’s have it – otherwise, I just know what I know from driving it, which is that it’s a no-shit amazing car.
And you thought the 5-series deserved to place lower in that test? OK – tell us why.
The whole thing smells like bait. For Farago.
In the world of irrelevant automotive journalism, I believe it’s called “artistic license”.
Was there a joke? The joke is that the Chevy Nova drag car looks less ridiculous than the X6 (M’d or otherwise).
To be honest, we Brits get the biggest kick of all when someone starts complaining that a joke needs to have a “Joke Alert” sign in attendance… If the joke is so obvious, it really isn’t that funny. Our humour is better than our cooking tho’…;-]
Has everyone here read this article? It wasn’t a pro-BMW article at all.
They made a satirical article about a satirical vehicle. The way the article read, the C&D folks were thinking that the X6M is slightly ridiculous, being a big truck with over-the-top power but almost no interior room. They got it stuck in the mud. They drag raced it with the A/C on. Etc.
Their inside joke almost seemed to be that only fools would buy this thing. At least that’s how I read it.
Also, for what it’s worth, in this month’s C&D they called the current 3-series tired and ready for a reboot.
Why are we concerned about C&D photochopping a fake event?
By showing concern, we are lending credence to the irrelevent.
C&D is irrelevant. This topic should be too.
Hmmm…Is that a big or small block in the Nova?
I think the joke would’ve been easier for most people to “get” if it had been an Insight or something and not a car that is legitimately fast, in an article focused on how fast that car is.
I read the article. Like everything from the pen of Phillips, it was satire (an attempt, at least). Taken in context, the photo needs no disclaimer or explanation; it fits with the general tone of the article that the X6M is an oddball vehicle.
Also, for what it’s worth, in this month’s C&D they called the current 3-series tired and ready for a reboot.
What the same 3-series they just had beat up on a G37, TL, and A4 back in June? The same one that’s going to be on the “10 Best” list again?
Was it an Edmunds-style, “We don’t like the 135i because the 335i is so wonderful. But, if the 3-series didn’t exist the 1-series would be the best car on the planet. Also, BMW is the greatest auto company of all time. Plus, no bias here because we don’t like the Honda Pilot.”?
You sure they weren’t talking about the 5-series? That line has only been getting 2nd places lately.
I think that C/D just delivers glancing criticisms to BMW in between fawning worship and comparison victories to make sure readers don’t get confused and think they are reading Roundel.
this is weak sauce. No one headlined, “XM6 outdrags worked Nova!” I read that article, and it was full of backhanded comments about the vehicle’s concept and derisive jabs at anyone who will buy the car.
C&D puts BMW in the winner’s circle (just like almost everyone else btw) b/c BMW makes a better car to drive than Infinite, Lexus, Audi and definitely Merc. C&D is clearly biased towards that standard, they celebrate it for Christ’s sake, so make sure to write an angry letter asking why the competitors with crap steering, understeer, and/or a misjudged suspension setups should win their tests. If you want trunk space comparisons go to another magazine. This is the only strong suit of the publication IMO.
I don’t often comment (mainly because I can’t be bothered to retrieve my login password and most here are more knowledgeable) but in Car and Driver’s defense, the magazine has considerably improved under Alterman – with the caveat that this is in comparison to what it had degraded to over the last several years, not to what it was from the 60s to early 80s. Maybe because each issue is my monthly bathroom reading, thus resulting in articles being reread regularly, but I have noticed that they are somewhat more willing to criticize cars, have regained some irreverence and quietly undid the formatting changes that were introduced. Now I will go back to lurking.
ajla :
October 6th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Also, for what it’s worth, in this month’s C&D they called the current 3-series tired and ready for a reboot.
What the same 3-series they just had beat up on a G37, TL, and A4 back in June? The same one that’s going to be on the “10 Best” list again?
Was it an Edmunds-style, “We don’t like the 135i because the 335i is so wonderful. But, if the 3-series didn’t exist the 1-series would be the best car on the planet. Also, BMW is the greatest auto company of all time. Plus, no bias here because we don’t like the Honda Pilot.”?
You sure they weren’t talking about the 5-series? That line has only been getting 2nd places lately.
I think that C/D just delivers glancing criticisms to BMW in between fawning worship and comparison victories to make sure readers don’t get confused and think they are reading Roundel.
OK, then you tell us what they’re missing about the 3-series. Why shouldn’t it have won that comparison test? Which should have won?
It’s one thing to criticize, quite another to formulate your own argument.
At the risk of repeating the comments of others, anyone who was “deceived” more than likely didn’t read the article. Context is important.
@FreedMike:
OK, then you tell us what they’re missing about the 3-series. Why shouldn’t it have won that comparison test? Which should have won?
If you want me to say that the 3-series is a bad car, I’m not going to because it isn’t. However, I do not consider it to be God’s gift to the automotive landscape. That seems to be Car and Driver’s feeling.
I personally like the C-class and CTS more than the 3-series. IMO, BMWs are the ultimate Mazdas. They are nimble and have very good steering, but unless you are driving flat-out the experience is poor. The brakes are grabby, the runflats roar relentlessly, and the ride isn’t nearly as composed as some of the competition.
Here’s an old TTAC review that sums up how I feel about BMWs: BMW 535i Review
I know that Car and Driver is an enthusiast publication, but it isn’t like they rate an Elise over a Boxster. I’m not asking for a Lexus to win, but giving some credit for balance in sport sedan comparo would be nice.
_________
That particular comparison test against the A4, TL, and G37 was flawed because they didn’t have the cars equalized. Two of them were automatics and the as-tested prices had a $10,000 range. This caused the scoring to be messed up. Was it really that impossible to round up a 328i, TL, A4, and G37 that all had the same transmission and came in around $38K? I have no idea which car should win because I haven’t driven a G37 or new A4 yet.
ajla :
October 6th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
If you want me to say that the 3-series is a bad car, I’m not going to because it isn’t. However, I do not consider it to be God’s gift to the automotive landscape. That seems to be Car and Driver’s feeling.
I personally like the C-class and CTS more than the 3-series. IMO, BMWs are the ultimate Mazdas. They are nimble and have very good steering, but unless you are driving flat-out the experience is poor. I have no idea which car should win because I haven’t driven a G37 or new A4 yet.
Thanks for that reply. I’ve driven the 335i pretty extensively (much to the frustration of my local BMW dealer), and I’ve found the ride is mainly a function of what suspension package you prefer. The sport package indeed comes with a pretty flinty ride, but the base suspension is no slouch, and while it doesn’t ride as comfortably as a CTS, I didn’t find it unreasonably harsh.
I also think the CTS is an excellent car in this class, but it’s skewed more towards comfort than performance. Not to say it’s not capable or that it’s a poor choice – far from it – but it’s not in the same league as the 3-series or G37 for driving involvment. I’m into going fast, so I know where my money would go, and that would be either the 3-series or the G37. Other folks may have other priorities, and Godspeed to them.
If you haven’t done so yet, drive a G37 and let me know what you think. Personally, I’d rate it above the 328, but behind the 335. As a value, it beats either BMW handily.