One thousand, six hundred and fifty-three words.
That may not sound like a lot. The reviews and features we publish at TTAC routinely go beyond that. Alex Dykes, when he really sweats the details, can easily reach 3,000 words in his reviews. Jack, when he isn’t even trying, will end up writing 1,600 words on a Matrix — just because. My reviews will easily eclipse the 2,000 word mark, even as I sit here complaining about not knowing what to say.
But 1,653 words equals approximately 8 minutes and 12 seconds of reading time, according to Read-o-Meter. That also may not seem like much, but the latest press release for the “all-new 2017 Mercedes-Benz GLS” is a massive time waster, even at its sub-10 minute read time.
Why? Because the only two things I learned from it were: Mercedes-Benz has renamed and slightly updated the GLS, and Mercedes-Benz writes press releases that are at least five times longer than they need to be.
Before you complain, “How does this affect me? I’m not the one reading press releases. You are. That’s your job!” We’ll get there. I promise.
I don’t mean to pick on Mercedes-Benz in particular. The tri-star automaker is just the latest offender in what is a widespread problem for us media folk.
Audi uses the word “dynamic” so often that it’s become a meme amongst automotive journalists. At the Civic media drive, Honda gave journalists a press release that can only be described as The Most Boring Book Ever, measuring in at — no word of a lie — over 100 pages. When I can describe the length of a press release in easy fractions of a ream of paper — 1/5th of a ream in this case — there’s definitely something wrong.
Yes, it is my job to find what’s important. That’s the job of all automotive journalists. However, when given the choice of two tasks you must determine two things about those tasks: the return (or benefit) and the effort required. Assuming the benefit of those jobs is the same, humans will tend to pick the option requiring less effort. Why would I pick the more time consuming option if the return for that effort is the same? If picking apples and being a lawyer paid the same, we would eat a lot more apple pies and sue each other far less, I’d say.
That’s the reason why Nissan is in the news almost every single day. Their media relations department understands brevity. They understand that the time journalists will spend researching a piece is inversely proportional to the chances of that piece being written. So, what do they do? They give you the facts, usually in point form at the very top, above a well-written — but to the point — press release.
And it works. I can skim through a Nissan press release, pick out the important bits, and have an article up in around 30 minutes.
In the case of this particular Mercedes press release, here’s what I could gleam from it at first glance:
- The GL has been renamed GLS (we knew that already);
- It gets additional DYNAMIC SELECT (all caps, because every automotive feature must be shouted) transmission modes;
- A new nine-speed 9G-TRONIC automatic transmission is used on all models except the GLS 63 AMG;
- The GLS 63 AMG gets 27 more horsepower, and other models see performance gains too;
- The front has been redesigned (even though it looks exactly as it did);
- There are new paint and wheel options;
- The steering wheel and instrument panel with color Media Display have been updated.
That’s 90 words, and I’m guessing that I missed a few really important points about the “all-new” GLS, which seems to be almost exactly like the old GL, just newer.
I totally realize my point-form version is a completely over-simplified of the original release (which can be found here if you’re interested), but burying the important bits with this does neither you (the car buyer), the automaker, nor the journalist any favors:
Once again the dimensions of the GLS bear witness to its full-size format, and form the best possible basis for providing its seven passengers with a generous amount of space.
Really, Mercedes-Benz? Is it “the best possible basis for providing its seven passengers with a generous amount of space?” I’m sure that the Grand Caravan could do the same thing, and probably at 1/4th the price. And “bear witness”? You aren’t rewriting John 5:31.
When a press release is burying the facts with phrases such as “bear witness,” it really makes me question everything else in the release. Why can’t you just give me the facts? Is my time worth that little to you that you must force me to wade through the fluff before double-checking every claim you make?
How does this affect you, the reader, the car buyer, the enthusiast, the industry professional?
It means that some automakers, regardless of the importance of their products, will perennially be in the lead when it comes to media coverage, and others will be constantly playing catch up. There’s a reason why I rarely write about BMW and Mercedes and write about Nissan and General Motors instead.
And that makes me look biased. And it makes you wonder why we are either biased in favor of one automaker or against another.
In a world that’s more connected than ever, where our audience expects up-to-the-minute news and information on either the latest vehicles or industry events, and where our resources are limited, we are constantly forced to decide where to best spend our time.
In a perfect world, I would treat each automaker equitably. However, in a perfect world, they would treat us equitably, too.
(Word count: 958.)
I agree with the premise of the post, good writing should convey its points in the least amount of words.
I have this discussion with people here at work all the time. I review their writing and strike out all the “to be” statements and most of the “that” as well.
Then they’re like “Huh, this reads a lot better now.”
Yeah, brevity! Leave the flowery language to novels.
To be or not to be…
You can lose a “that” about 80% of the time.
Quote from my high school English teacher, who really tried to prepare us for college writing. It’s always stuck with me.
“There are exactly two situations in the English language where using ‘that’ is appropriate. And I’m not going to tell you what they are.”
I remember being told something similar, after writing a bit I understand it better now.
Hey, have a bright spot to your afternoon and have a look. Sort of unrelated, but at least it’s a truck based SUV like the horrible GL.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Oldsmobile-Bravada-Base-Sport-Utility-4-Door-/181919837900?vxp=mtr
Huh? The GL/GLS-Class isn’t truck-based. It’s a unibody, on an extended version of the M/GLE-Class architecture…which I believe is also still shared with the Grand Cherokee and Durango.
The use of this electronic media means that one has no choice but to be brief and to the point. I read an article about how the internet and the ability to find relevant bits of information quickly is reshaping how we read. We are loosing the ability to wade through large volumes of information to find the specific pieces we require.
Some PR types need to go on the premise that we have the attention span of a dog in a field full of SQUIRRELS :)
Ah ha, no wonder I haven’t “seen” you here lately Kyree, you changed your picture like all these other people – ruining my easy comment selective reading!
I always thought it was truck based, to differentiate it from the ML which was unibody-vanny.
So it’s a really stretched ML. Interesting. I still hate it.
Yes, I rebranded. Same logo, different presentation. Apparently, the bright green color of the previous version was quite noticeable and stood out in the comments.
As for the GL/GLS-Class, it’s one of the default “well-off” cars in my area…that and the Yukon Denali, in pearl white.
But you weren’t a logo before, you were a photo of a man.
The black guy? That was a picture of me, haha.
But that was mid-2014, at the latest. For more than a year, I’ve had a green square with that same “W” logo in it. I rebranded because I redesigned my website.
No way! That definitely didn’t change to a W for me until pretty recently, now that you reminded me. Def not a year ago. Is it possible, I wonder, there’s a cookie lag for some users with regard to avatar pics?
I thought the pic was Nick Cannon or something. LAWL
Worlds pretty screwed up when people want 45 bucks for a stock MY94 Bravada with nearly 140K.
Lol crikey I didn’t see the miles were that high. Just that it was a super clean example of something very unpopular and rare.
I like the green + gold wheels combo.
You’re thinking of cache, not cookies. But that’s most likely what happened. I’m a web designer/developer, so I’m in the habit of hitting Cmd + Shift + R every time I reload a page to do a hard refresh and keep the browser from showing me cached content.
Lawyer here… most of the “that”s I use in my professional writing are to make the logical structure of a sentence absolutely airtight so no one can claim, even implausibly, that it means something different.
In most settings I probably wouldn’t use them.
That… is an interesting perspective. Ha!
I’m here all week.
The Ceding Company agrees that;
1) Claims will be…
—
I do use those!
One of the most important skills of a good writer is eliminating unnecessary verbiage.
Ditto, TV writers should take that to heart. Ever seen a script or a TV cartoon?
MB writers must be paid by the word, just like VW engineers are paid to “pass” tests.
Works for me. So long, days of Ctrl+c, Ctrl+v!
The point of a long-winded press release is to provide enough material for you and your brethren to edit and rework into a shorter article. Most automotive “journalism” consists of just that.
That’s the sad part. It is definitely used as a crutch for many a “journalist”.
Do you think writer’s on this site are journalists?
Do you think most of those who call themselves journalists, are journalists?
Some are. Some aren’t. Some are sometimes. Some aren’t other times.
I think that’s a hat you can wear or not wear, depending on whether it’s appropriate or not.
Obviously, someone just telling a story is not a journalist. However, when we cover topics that relate to the here-and-now of the industry, it’s time to wear the journalist hat, even if we may poke fun here and there.
I’m not necessarily being critical of it. When an automaker releases a new car, develops a new motor, etc., we find out about it because they told you that they did it and you pass on the word
It isn’t investigative journalism, nor does it need to be. It’s not as if you need to meet your sources in back alleys and dark parking garages in order to learn about the latest horsepower increase or automatic transmission. The industry almost always wants us to know because cars are consumer products and they want us to be interested in what they have to sell.
It’s one thing to be detailed. It’s another thing entirely to speak of a new product like it’s one step away from curing cancer.
Sure, but your job as a writer is to skip the press releases that don’t matter, and to tone down the hype and provide the details that are relevant for the ones that do. Bonus points if you can offer some facts or context that aren’t in the press release or otherwise add some sort of insight.
@Pch101
And I try to, which is why I wrote the Cadillac story a couple of days ago the way I did. There is a non-trivial overlap in CTS and CT6 pricing, but it isn’t spelled out to you in the press release. Why would it be?
However, even that CT6 press release was incredibly brief. GM at least knows what it’s doing on that front. Mercedes-Benz, not so much.
There may be an element of native English speakers vs non-native English speakers in the GM vs Mercedes brevity.
I think that’s who these long releases are for. Mercedes knows if they use these long phrases and grandiose words, some fool at Y! Autos or MSN or SkyMiles Auto etc. will paste it into an article, and add their own six or eight praising words to it.
Their message gets out the door exactly as they liked, with little clipping or editing, and John411TEXAS over on Yahoos clicks, reads it, then posts about how Obama has caused big SUVs.
It works for Merc enough times to make it a habit.
It’s more a lack of quality than quantity. I’ve got a stack of old Motor Sport magazines from the mid-70s to the mid-80s and every article is chock full of words, describing personal experiences driving the car over a few weeks, the writer’s opinion of the representative that lent the car and a rant about Niki Lauda destroying racing. They’re all long, formal pieces that read more like a short story than a review.
Compare that to most modern magazines which seem to be a novelization of the car’s stats with no real personal approach at all. I like more words. Just make sure they have some significance, or are at least entertaining.
Good points–none of us has enough time! And unfortunately, there are those “journalists” who will cut and paste those press release item into a “review” and call it a day.
You raise the point of all automakers treating us (I’m assuming journalists) equitably. Care to give examples of that inequitable treatment–perhaps in another article?
I’m not going to name names or manufacturers, but I will point out two examples of inequitable treatment.
I’ve had PR reps straight up tell me, “Why would we invite TTAC on a media drive if there’s a chance of receiving negative coverage when we can bring another outlet who’s coverage will definitely be favorable, even though they might have less readership?”
Also, TTAC will never get invited on an exotic or luxury car test drive. Why? Even though the B&B might nerd out over it, TTAC’s readership is not the perceived target demographic. And we might be too harsh about their new, shiny thing.
Personally, I think it’s fine to be excluded from the fancy-pants car game. The internet is awash with “professional” reviews of cars I will never buy.
It’s weirdly harder to find unbiased professional reviews of _normal_ cars. That’s what I come to TTAC for.
I can find glowing, vapid reviews of the latest Ferrari somewhere else.
What Wolfinator said. The focus on normal cars is why I’m here. I may (and, in fact, as of three months ago, do) own a mass-market luxury car, bought used for the price of a new Accord Sport, but I’m never going to own an exotic of the type Jack typically covers over at R&T.
The problem is that reviews are the bread-and-butter of the automotive media. Fewer reviews >> fewer pageviews >> less ad revenue.
Thank you!
There’s no doubt that if we post a Camry review it will garner more traffic than, say, a Pagani Zonda or whatever it is that they build. And I am totally fine with not going on these “fancy-pants car” media drives. For one thing, I wouldn’t fit in with that crowd because I’d be wearing three-year-old Adidas Gazelles and Joe Fresh button up shirts. Also, could I even review such a car when I have no experience with its competitors? Probably not well.
Au contraire mon frere…the TTAC hooplehead demographic could care less about comparing the latest Ferrari with the newest Lamborghini; we want to see how they stack up against a Hellcat/Z28/GT350/Panther/etc The inventor of modern automotive “journalism”, the late douche D.E.D. Jr. in cahoots with Jim Wangers and “Jay Z” Delorean had the temerity back in 1964 to comparo test a Pontiac GTO and Ferrari GTO; and then the cojones to declare the Poncho the winner! Look what it did for them. It made their careers. That’s what we wanna see, so quit your bitching and whining and step up to the plate and demand your seat at the table so we can be entertained by gawd!
Mark, A lot of my reviews have been done without having driven direct competitors. I’ve tested high end Jaguars and Audis but not BMWs and M-Bs (and can’t personally afford any of them so I can’t offer fiscal advice on which to buy). I just evaluate a car on its own merits or flaws. Also, I think there’s value in an automotive writer getting a taste of what’s possible in terms of performance or luxury, just for perspective. I also think they should try and drive entry level cars as well, for the same reason.
Not that any manufacturer would agree to it, but I’d love to do the reverse of Top Gear’s “big star in a cheap car” bit, and put a Camry driver into a Ferrari or McLaren for a week, using it as a daily driver.
Brevity is good.
TLDR ;-)
Thought from the headline that I was going to come in here and complain that fine detail in press releases is a good thing, so we plebs can figure out trim levels, features, etc.
Then read the story and saw that the complaint is about ridiculously turgid language. Now 100% in agreement.
I agree with this, I think q fair share of writing outlets could use less “writing”, the entertainment field is full of “writers” who believe in “quantity over quality”, let alone the supposed “journalism” field.
The less content, the more words. It’s not always true, but usually.
Think how punchy and concise the press release could be for the following new information:
“XYZ Motors today announces their new ABC car, which is powered by the new DEF engine, which develops over 600 horsepower and 400 lb-ft of torque in a normally aspirated 1.4 liter package, yet returns 40+ mpg in the EPA mixed cycle test and meets all 2020 Federal emissions and safety standards. An extensive durability testing program predicts engine life of greater than 200,000 miles. The ABC car still provides comfortable seating for 6 adults, with generous luggage space, and will be offered with a full complement of electronic assist devices and entertainment options. MSRP will be released later but is currently projected to be $30,000 – $35,000.”
Compare this to pages and pages written to try to convince you that the latest minor redesign of the IP to move the touchscreen 2″ to the left and 1″ up, plus a new front clip that makes the grille 1/2″ wider, are significant and worthy of interest.
That’s because something that is interesting and significant in itself needs little verbosity to try to sell it. Something that is not, ends up getting the full treatment.
Gosh, reading is so tough. Why would it take someone 8 minutes to read 1650 words? That’s only 200 words a minute (note gratuitous insertion of “that”). Surely most reasonably practised readers are much quicker?
The drones working for Marketing have to justify their existence, and all they have to work with are words and a video complete with portentous music innapropriate to the theme, just like 99.6% of YouTube postings.
The company flacks have to assume that the average reader is not familiar with the vehicle in question, unlike industry journalists, so brevity is not top of their list when it comes to issuing releases on updated vehicles.
I mean, a WSJ or Bloomberg journo can hardly remember what day it is, so you help them out with words that might make them look like they are
actually conscious.
” At the Civic media drive, Honda gave journalists a press release that can only be described as The Most Boring Book Ever, measuring in at — no word of a lie — over 100 pages.”
How does Honda make a 100 page book on the Civic? Do they detail the models history or something?
I’m surprised that some “journalists” dont just sell them on ebay.
Plenty of press kits end up on eBay, but these days most “press kits” are either a thumb drive or a link to a website.
Ah thats lame, the ebay part I mean, but thats why I only trust a small group of journalists. Imo they should provide the journalists with gas, a link with brief info, and a car for review, no “trinkets”.
You’re one of the few good ones, your articles tend to have the neatest vintage subjects.
I’ve bitched about Barruth’s editorial diarrhea for years. I don’t even bother with his posts anymore.
This really hurts because I’ve always taken care to speak well of you.
Perhaps I got lost in translation. When someone who makes over 100K per year to do his beloved job, perhaps he should quit and let someone else take over.
In addition, initally, I was hoping to see an actual review…not a few lines about a few updates on the GLS along with plenty of bitching.
I’m certain at times, you love reviewing cars, and giving your input. This time, if you are so jaded, you can’t appreciate Mercedes-Benz…then let someone else take the assignment. I’m sure you will still get paid.
I see you didn’t read the actual article. That’s okay. At least you clicked and left a comment that’s totally off base.
This was a great article
However it could have used another 642 words, to really shine
And do you think Nissan build a car to equal the quality of their media relations department?