Tesla might well be in the wrong, but the article is frankly written in a biased way. > Rather than going back to the drawing board to improve the Model S's de

Tesla might well be in the wrong, but the article is frankly written in a biased way. > Rather than going back to the drawing board to improve the Model S's design What is Tesla is right, and the test is inadequate? Ultimately the only thing that matters is for the car to be safe on the road, and passing IYI-designed tests may or may not approximate that well enough. > Tesla then continued on saying the most accurate crash test is done by the Why not quote the full Tesla statement? We're left thinking that Tesla has reasons for disagreeing with this test, but the reasons are conveniently omitted. The whole article literally only quotes seven words written by Tesla themselves. >Tesla quickly responded saying IIHS has "motivation that suits their own subjective purposes." [...] Still, IIHS wasn't bashing Tesla in the least as they rated the Model S as "Good" in the moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint & seats test. This last sentence is blatantly dishonest. A test result being good has no bearing on whether the test is fair. I feel like this bias could only be conscious and deliberate, with the author hoping that people won't be critical/skeptical enough readers for it to work. This is disgraceful "journalism".