It’s been a bit of a meta-critical and navel-gazing week or so here at TTAC. We’ve been reviewed and discussed by other media sources, we’ve reviewed and discussed a few media sources ourselves, and we’ve even had a delightful piece by Brendan McAleer which sort of reviews our own reviews of someone else’s review of us.
It’s safe to say that we will probably be taking a break from this sort of thing for a while so that we can bring you some more of the authentic TTAC content you’ve come to know and love. Clinical, yet strangely erotic, descriptions of trunk space. Callous disregard for human decency in the last of the Ford full-sizers. Chinese business news. That sort of thing.
Fortunately or unfortunately, however, we will continue to encounter “content” from our colleagues in the business which is mendaciously conceived, shamelessly produced, and incompetently edited. Which leads me to my question:
There are few things I personally enjoy more than absolutely flame-broiling some buffalo-esque, brown-baggy-pants-wearing, buffet-browsing media-beast. I was born for it, and I don’t care if everybody I meet at every press launch from now until the end of time hates my guts as a result. There’s a long list of potential candidates for horse-whipping in my old-fashioned Franklin Planner and I’m willing to metaphorically re-enact various torture scenes from “Hostel” with each one of them. Payoffs will be exposed. Press-release-rewriting will be discussed in devastating detail. Shuffle-steerers will be flogged.
At your signal, I will unleash hell…
…which means I need to hear that signal from you. Do you want a meta-critical piece once a week? Once a month? Never ever again? Do you want me to find out who’s taking free cars behind the scenes? Do you want to know about the guy who claims to be driving at the limit in his articles but in reality saves his most devastating work for the breakfast bar?
Perhaps you’d like to see some stunts. I could buy an old Ford Tempo automatic, mount a GoPro on the bumper, and insert myself into the next supercar press event driving loop to cause chaos. I could pretend to be a writer for an in-flight magazine and see how many outrageous bribes I can have shipped to a Vegas hotel room. I could smoke out a monster Town Car donut in the middle of the street, right in front of a major manufacturer’s dinner event, while journalists literally cower in fear behind the party shuttles. Wait. I already did that. Okay. I’ll think of some other stuff.
You, the reader, are in charge. If you want me to leave Dutch Mandel alone, we’ll do it. If you want everything he writes from today until eternity subjected to the most blistering criticism possible, we can do that, too.
Just give the word. Or, failing that, give your opinion!
All all for exposing B.S.,regardless of the source. In other words if you see,or experience it,…lets read about it.
Jack…..this is TTAC if you write garbage,or something nobody wants to read, trust me, you will hear about it.
Jack, Mikey said it better than I – go for it!
For once I am in complete agreement with these two crazy Impala drivers. :-) Unleash hell, Jack!
There are no pearls without an irritant. Be the irritant, we’ll do the rest.
First of all, +2 points for using the word ‘mendaciously’.
Second of all, do you really want to be ‘that guy’? Too much ranting will only get you ignored at the end of the day. fire and brimstone only holds appeal for so long, and only when used in moderation. I would prefer that you stick to a fair and balanced approach and limit the righteous indignation for calling out those whose transgressions are just to egregious to ignore. The self-immolating Panamera piece comes to mind as an excellent example of this. Obviously, even the most deserving anger should be tempered with constructive criticism and ceding of deserved praise. I believe this tactic was once called the “Wobble” on this very site.
I like the idea of writing a once-a-week expo article on the auto industry. I’ve really been enjoying these articles.
I have no inside perspective into the car journo world, but I have read many magazine comparos with very predictable results. As an example, many C&D comparos where a BMW 3-series has mutliple electrical glitches yet still manages to win. Now let me ask you, Mr C&D writer, how would you feel if this was your personal car that’s throwing an electrical temper tantrum and now you have to deal with the BMW service folks yourself? Are you maybe driving a “free” BMW yourself?
It would be great to have the dirt on why these types of articles keep getting written.
+1
I like the insider views, plus, fuck those guys.
In all honestly, I don’t care too much about that stuff, especially when it’s primary function is simply to make us, as readers, feel a little more smug and self-righteous.
I do think it’s important to expose corruption, however, as a way of trying to keep it from spreading too readily, for when corruption becomes an accepted part of a culture, it’s already too late.
So I guess it depends on what you’re trying to do and how you do it. If it’s all about mere entertainment and making me (the reader) feel great about catching some smarmy ‘no-gooder,’ then no thanks (I can watch a Disney move for that), but if it’s about trying to shed important light on a potentially serious problem, then I’m all for it.
p.s. Thanks as well for not saying “which begs the question.” (I’m still having a hard time getting used to the recent, more colloquial use of this phrase.)
p.p.s. If you have a few minutes you should watch Adam Curtis’ short film “The Rise and Fall of the TV News Journalist.” It’s an interesting perspective and an enjoyable view on a number of levels (as are most, if not all of Curtis’ films–as some here have probably determined by now, I think highly of some of Curtis’ stuff). If interested, go to http://adamcurtisfilms.blogspot.com/ under the heading “Three Short Films”)
+1
Regardless of content, intent shines through an article to the reader. As long as the exposé is intended to “…shed important light on a potentially serious problem…” then by all means, take out that Baruth literary cannon and fire away.
Agreed.
Bring it on, but a daily diet of bitter herbs would be too much. After all, this site is “The Truth About Cars”, not “The Bad About Auto-Journalists”.
And be sure your own house isn’t made of glass before you throw stones.
Having said all that, I’ve greatly enjoyed your work, Jack.
just do what’s natural. I think the site was going pretty well as it is. After all, the article about all the shehanigans among the auto-journalist were a response to another article about TTAC. So it happened naturally, the right time for such article. Just don’t consciously want to be “the site that exposes all the ills of the auto-journalism” or whatever. Also I don’t think anyone should be purposely ‘shielded’ from critical articles, Dutch Mandel or not. Certainly if something noticeably out of order happenings such as auto-journalist praising a car that blown its turbos on the track (a Porsche, no less, something that you would expect to be used on track) or a magazine nominating Dodge Caliber as “the best car of 2011” or something then that certainly would be an ample justification for a critical piece.
Jack, you should be you.
The Porsche piece was classic because it was organic. Lay it out when it needs to be laid out, continue on your typical TTAC course when it doesn’t need to be.
Keep being.
Agree with this.
Frankly, this sort of inside-baseball media bashing grows tiresome pretty quickly, particularly from a web site that doesn’t take kindly to being criticized or corrected itself. I think most of the readers here have things pretty well figured out or are capable of figuring it out if they choose to engage in the intellectual exercise. And if they don’t, well, what’s the point?
Stick to writing about the cars, it’s what you do best.
Some of the pieces are good. I like that TTAC exposes both sides, the companies and the journalists. However, sometimes the stabs, at fellow journalists, seem a little on the weak side…a bit of a reach. I don’t want to come hear and read tit for tat articles, as TTAC gets in p_ssing matches with other websites. On the other hand, borrowing from George Carlon, I don’t mind a little of the former in your articles.
I’m thinking I’d keep the flaming sword hit pieces to no more than once a day. …..ok, maybe once in the morning and once in the afternoon.
Jack, perhaps you should decide whether you want to be seen as a serious journalist or simply as an entertainer. To me, you’re a peerless entertainer with a gift for the zinger, the well-chosen phrase and the potent bit of hyperbole. But as someone above noted, this can wear thin and start to look more like shtick than anything else. Maybe better to put your estimable intelligence in the service of something more lasting than today’s chuckles and titillation.
I think that’s why Jack is such a good writer. His work is entertaining to read but fairly dense with information. He’s got a pretty good record, as this post shows, of asking others if he has overdone it. The thing is, style is style. You don’t want to become a cliche, but you have to be yourself.
Let it rip Jack. Unleash your inner Baruth and go Farago over their sorry a$#es. It’s about time that someone shines some light on automotive journalism and no one is in a better position to do that than you.
…Chinese business news…. that sort of thing.
LOL
Just keep calling balls and strikes in your own strike zone. If it’s another Porsche story, so be it. Just give us the truth – like always – and keep it coming. Luckily, in this world you don’t have to look very hard.
Under the guise of looking for the truth we as a group are greatly entertained by the cutting down of anybody high (or even medium high) on a pedestal. It’s become our own version of Brangelina and the National Enquirer, which, of course, we’ll haughtily deny to our dying day. Because, we just want the truth. As long as it’s dirty and someone looks bad, while we can smugly read on.
Keep rockin’. I’m just as cheap and sleazy as the rest of us. Actually cheaper and sleazier – we need more stories about cheap women loaded with NSFW graphics.
I’d say once a week is about the most I can handle.
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.
Jack,
If you see it, write about it – if not, write something else.
It needs to be organic and real and most certainly funny – I like Christmas but certainly don’t need it to come every Tuesday like clock work.
This.
+1
If you smell something bad, yes, please expose it. But I doubt that you’ll discover worthy scandals on a timely basis, so I’d suggest you focus on car reviews or autobiographical stories, or whatever-it-is that you write about most of the time.
If you feel obliged to generate a weekly Scandal! piece to satisfy TTAC, A) after a while it won’t seem fresh (or “scandalous”) anymore, kinda like U.S. federal politics, and B) not every scandal-of-the-week will be truly outrageous anyway.
I enjoy your writing as-is. Please don’t feel obligated to drum up fresh scandal for page-hits.
stuart
+2. Ditto.
+howevermany
If you have knowledge of payoffs or other direct BS, police it. THAT is journalism (or is it meta-journalism?) We hear the other sources, they’re just … boring. It’s nice to know who to pay less than no attention to. Other than that, keep writing what pops into your gonzo gourd. It’s all been good so far.
Jack without a doubt keep these coming. Once a month sounds good.
In my eyes these are among the most interesting parts of TTAC. I’d rank order as 1) Baruth’s exposes and car stories, 2) Sajeev’s Q&A columns, 3) Ed’s afternoon/early evening think pieces, especially on the Detroit 3 since he seems to have good insider access, 4) Hammer Time especially when sharing the industry insider POV, 5) New car reviews [but insightful comparos ala Baruth’s VW 2.0T last week are even more interesting when done right].
I would consider skipping the inconsequential red light camera pieces from local newspapers but that’s just me.
I would say don’t go overboard. As Paul said above “Lay it out when it needs to be laid out”. I like your writing style Jack and enjoy reading your articles, but I think the type of articles we are discussing could reach a saturation point fairly quickly. I say once a month would probably be about right [/2¢]
There’s always too much of a good thing. Once a week feels like too much. And please, no more exposes based on the “Robb Report.” As if! The Robb Report is one of several magazines which arrive in my mailbox because I live in the “right” zip code, not because I’ve ever handed over any money to them.
That said, your Porsche story was great. And consider, if you’re going to be “The Truth About Car Magazines” that you should occasionally give some valentines to the buff books which actually — sometimes — review a car with a critical eye.
And you shouldn’t let websites out from under your radar either. I’m thinking of the “mother proof” site which purports to review cars from the mommy’s perspective. I’m o.k. with the concept, but when these ladies stray from the kind of car that you would assume is in the target demographic, the results can be pretty hilarious. I’m waiting for their “truth in advertising” review of the Porsche 911 as schoolbus.
Aim for P.J. O’Rourke style auto journalism. Exposing truth, idiocy and the American way. Keep it honest and funny, without needless attacks that undercut your credibility.
You can mention that so and so gets certain perks. Let us draw the conclusion, rather than adding on a rant. The facts can speak for themselves. Save your opinions, rants and attitude for the cars. Your review style is always entertaining and informative. When you and Michael Karesh both review the same car, then we’ve got some real information.
Well, if you want to be thought of as a sanctimonious, ninny extremist automotive chap then fire away, or else I would heed Sundowner’s advice.
There’s really room for only one holier-than-thou, self-righteous, pious, smug PD on the web.
Whew, glad I was able to hold my opinion of that guy in.
If you suddenly find yourself alone and writing in Elysian fields, do not be afraid. For your career is already dead….
Seriously, J.B…. if you put a quota on it, you diminish it… because you’ll be reaching for it to fulfill the quota, not to get it out for it’s own sake….
You just keep on bein’ our own personal automotive Caligula and let the articles write themselves…. ; )
I vote for once or twice a month. Jack’s writing is nearly always enjoyable, but the problem with writing about unpleasantness is that it’s unpleasant. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll eat my broccoli; I know it’s good for me, and I feel somewhat proud of myself for having done it. But if more exposés would deprive us of outrageous anecdotes or car reviews, then please don’t get carried away with them.
I say when you find someone with their hand in the cookie jar, then by all means – fire away. I’ve long quit believeing Car & Drival.
I’d say keep the fire and brimstone coming. Just make sure it is true; if there isn’t any skullduggery to report then no need to scrape up anything contrived. If I am not getting real reporting from other car magazines, I certainly want to know, and why.
I’m no huge fan of Steve Harvey, but he once said something that I appreciated:
“How will I know when I’ve gone too far if I never go over there?”
I say go as far as you dare, and if it gets to be too much for the readers, we’ll let you know (nicely).
investigative journalism is hard to come by these days. I personally am in favor of digging deep to discover the truth and am willing to provide some interesting topics for research.
Jack – I hope you’ll continue to call bull$%#t whereever and whenever the need may arise. I suspect TTaC has more impact in the hallowed halls of PR-dom than most of us realize, and you’ve put yourself on point in your squadron of scribes.
I like the writing and exposes, but I’d go light on the stunts. tTAC doesn’t need to be the Jackass of the car world.
But yes, more please.
Publish, or be damned. The consequences are not your problem. The no holds barred position built this site, from the ground up. What would Robert Farago had done? The truth needs to get out there, whatever the truth is, in whatever form it may come. If those credos are not valid anymore, then this isn’t the truth about cars.
WWRFD?
awesome
A little less Olbermann, a little more Cronkite, please. Let the truth speak louder than the teller.
A little more Michael Savage-like please
How about everyday?!
I totally disagree with the notion that if it’s done on a regular basis people will get used to it and over time it will be ignored.
To the contrary, I believe if it’s done right it will get a lot of attention. I cannot think of a better example than the political comedian Jon Stewart who does this every day and his videos go viral on the web. It is however very difficult to keep it within the boundaries of journalism and not make any personal comments which I guess is the key to success with this sort of reporting.
I like reading about automotive “journalism” chicanery. However, I much more enjoy reading you write about cars, driving, and why it is such a passion. My vote is that you should keep the love of the wheel in first place and share whatever else of interest comes up. It seems to be working so far.
I’m with the consensus above, you do you, and write about whatever inspires you about any particular story, that will keep the quality high.
On the other hand, I want to see (very metaphorically) mushroom stamps on foreheads when something like this Porsche fleet access thing comes up. TTAC’s future content quality is being threatened, and by exactly the dynamic which has ruined most car journalism in my own lifetime. It’s this very issue which gave TTAC the room to grow into what it is, namely the cowing of print publications by manufacturer fleet minders. You should be more aggressive in soliciting our help by the way. You should be posting relevant contact info for Porsche PR with every story…most of us should have letter writing skills that go hand in hand with that demo data referenced earlier. And you are going to find a lot of club members on here, whether they post or not. Ask for those that care to reach out on these issues.
Jack, it’s your pulpit. Do what you see fit. However, I would suggest that it’s time to consider all of the ramifications of McLuhan’s pronouncement that “the media is the message”.
I really enjoy your writing when you have a story to tell. So, with a mischievous streak a mile wide, I have to sheepishly endorse keeping supercars honest with a Tempo. I also appreciate calling other writers to account, but in my opinion, even the Panamera barbecue enthusiast isn’t worth an entire piece. A sentence and a link deliver the same withering blow. Your own Panamera adventure, on the other hand, unfolds many facets into a complete perspective. It’s like a slow buildup that reveals Wile E. Coyote standing on thin air: all the better when you don’t see it coming.
Keep revealing the tales that no one else has the nerve to expose! Your story about the abusive, cursing “journalist” bullying to get a loaner car because he didn’t even own a personal car inspired me to email seven of Canada’s most prominent auto writers to ask if they owned their own cars and if they accepted long term loaners for family members. I only heard back from half of them, all of whom said they own their own cars. The other half must not or else don’t bother responding to their public.
We need to know “The Truth About Cars” and your writing will hopefully cause changes in the way the PR business is conducted.
The blog or website title holds the key “The Truth About Cars”, tell the truth about the products, the industry, the media. The “truth will set you free”!
Tony D
http://www.newedgeperformance.com
“Move every zig, for great justice”
Jack – don’t stop until they sweat blood.
-James Mackintosh
Jack, your writing and subjects have progressed from “Stupid Shit I did when I was young” to “How I Cheated on my Girlfriend at Last Weekend’s Track Event” to something much more interesting and relevant to the actual “Truth About Cars.” Your inside the bubble perspective of the incestuous relationship between automakers and the press is insightful, interesting, and sheds light on a dirty part of the auto journalism business that every other participant has a vested interest in keeping quiet about.
In the process your writing has become more polished, focused, and less like a letter to Penthouse. The 20 year old fanboys may miss your older articles, but your new ones are not only better written and more insightful but can actually make a positive impact throughout automotive journalism. That is something you will be able to look back on and be proud of.
Readers that don’t want to know this info can skip the article or read a puff piece in many other forums. Some people can’t handle the truth, that’s why the sports section of every newspaper is a rah-rah report fluffing the local teams.
But the fact that somebody is not only exposing these corrupt practices but also naming names could have a serious and positive impact on automotive journalism, and isn’t that really what The Truth About Cars is all about?
.
I’m leaning toward the 1x/Week-Max camp for the full-on “Battle of The Somme”/Maximus Decimus Meridius -pieces.
And then, possibly as you go through writing others, weave in ~1 or 2 phrases per 300 words, as the context presents a fun opportunity.
–Or even as a thriller/mystery writer would do: Hint at a future thread/post that will be the full-expose of that 1 dropped morsel; ie:Telegraph/Foreshadow.
*Too much of a good thing can burn out quickly on a blogger’s schedule.
Daily is too much.
It’s also kinda fun to have a certain amount of excited anticipation for the next episode.
But yes, I do like these pieces, & the “Dr. Strangehatch”-one was a pretty impressive shellacking.
.
So: ~1x week, maybe as a whole new column, maybe-hinted-at-elsewhere along the way ala Christie/Rowling, go ahead and: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmvnXKRfdb8
.
Personal requests?
1) Forcibly cram Ray Wert into a “Team America, World Police” jumpsuit at gunpoint, and air-drop him out the back of a C-130 over Tehran; parachute optional.
2) Make Lieberman wear respectable shoes.
Before you make Ray jump, though, ask him if he went to his high school reunion, and if so, what he drove. No answer = optional parachute.
I vote for a once a week column dedicated to this!!
PS: Even Jung said the Shadow Character, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=508kGP8JO2o ,had some use.
So if You/TTAC don’t do it,
who will?
let the reign of terror continue, but, in the name of humanity, please spare Tommy Kendall and Jay Leno…….the Top Gear crew are fair game, though.
I registered just to reply to this post!
Anyway, I love some of the expose-style articles y’all post. But I think they’ve been coming a bit too frequently lately, and more importantly, I think they’re occasionally failing some sort of news-worthiness criteria.
For example, is a car writer for Robb Report, or anything about Robb Report, necessarily news-worthy? If some company posts “Customer Satisfaction Ratings” or something to that effect, and then some other blog likes them, but we have never heard of the blog nor the company, then do we care?
I love that TTAC digs to the bottom of these things, but I think they’d be better served by a once-a-week or once-a-month post in situations like these. Then it’d be “So-and-so the auto editor was on TTAC’s ‘Weekly Inglorious Round-Up,\'” instead of “TTAC posted an expose about… some guy! He was being dishonest!”
Jack, while I enjoy just about everything you write, I’d prefer you write more about cars and less about auto “journalists”. I’d also like to read more about how cars fit in with your interests. For example, if a car interior offers room in the back seat to fool around, let us know how well it works for that purpose. Can you carry a long instrument like a Stingray bass in a hardshell case in the car? Rate the hooning potential for the cars. I’m also more interested in cars in the Volkswagen GTI through Corvette price range than anything above $100k. Let us know what you like and where manufacturers or the aftermarket needs to make improvements.
Jack,
I have thoroughly enjoyed the car journo expose, but I don’t think this needs to be a regular article. I am falling into the camp with many of my fellow TTACers – if it happens on your watch, feel free to unleash whatever you deem necessary. There is no need to go out of your way on a regular basis for this type of article, as it will most likely occur unprompted on a regular basis.
There’s no such thing as boring stories. Only boring writers. You, Jack, are not amongst their number. As for the number of articles to write and when to write them, check with your editor. He’s curiously silent on this topic.
JB’s editor’s permissiveness speaks volumes, but there must be some suppressed stories………..boy, would I love to read THEM! I’m no sycophant, and disagree with, or am skeptical of, a lot you have to say, but keep up the reign of terror…….think madcap….Hunter would be proud of you (or better yet, jealous).
dvp,
There’s probably more self-censorship than suppressed stories. I’m pretty sure all the TTAC writers have a file they’d love to publish but can’t for a variety of reasons. Ed rarely rejects my work but there are pieces that just wouldn’t work at TTAC. I’ve published work at Cars In Depth by a writer who asked me to use a pen name for him because it was way politically incorrect.
Jack doesn’t give a sh!t what car companies think, but he does care about having thoughtful readers. That’s why he writes for TTAC.
Robert,
I think the editor’s primary job is to put the right team together. Then you have to trust the writers that you pick. You might need to spike the odd story or edit something but mostly you go to war with the army you have.
If you keep it truthful, then it remains relevant. I recall reading a story about Fiat (after they safely retreated from our borders the first time) leaving fur jackets for the wives of the press corp (in correct sizes, no less) in case they ‘got cold’. (PC alert…it was the 70’s)
I’m sure most of it is not that blatant, but flying me to some exotic destination in the middle of NA Winter would also be “a gift”. I’m really not going to learn anything I couldn’t back home with a press kit and loaner for three hours.
Jack: Here is a story that you might have missed in the Columbus Dispatch on Monday. They buried the lede, under human interest goop about the deceased. It is really about cops and high speed pursuit.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2011/09/05/loved-ones-wonder-was-chase-necessary.html
Hannah, a 16-year-old junior at Utica High School and the Career and Technology Education Centers of Licking County, died when the pickup truck in which she was riding crashed at 9:43 p.m. into a high embankment and a tree during a pursuit by Utica police on a winding country road in rural Licking County.
Her on-again, off-again boyfriend, 17-year-old Spencer Lorenza, was driving. He was taken to Grant Medical Center, but his condition was not available yesterday.
…
Lorenza fought with another boy at the Utica football game. Lorenza was angry and left sometime during the third quarter. Hannah went with him. No one is saying what, exactly, about the fight prompted a police pursuit.
Hannah’s family … Why, they wonder, would police chase Lorenza after a high-school fight when they knew who he was and where he lived and could have caught up with him later? Why would Lorenza have fled in the first place? And why, on a foggy night, didn’t police at least stop the chase once it reached Reynolds Road, a narrow, hilly, tree-canopied country road?
Hannah’s father, Jerry Gattrell, said authorities told him the pursuit reached speeds of at least 70 mph; Reynolds Road has posted signs of 15-mph curves.
=================================================
Do you ever want to have central OH TTAC meetup?
RELEASE WOTAN!!!
Jack, bring as much hell as we can dine in, and as long as it makes sense to bring it.
I’m late to the party, but Jack, please release all fury you possibly can on the automotive press. Seriously. Oh, and another Town Car burnout would be greatly appreciated.
The fact that you’re asking the Best and Brightest to justify your content to Edward makes me think that you’ve outgrown TTAC.