4 ms·

It should not surprise me that the Washington Post, the paper that ran 2-3 hit pieces per day against Musk after he announced his intent to acquire twitter is

It should not surprise me that the Washington Post, the paper that ran 2-3 hit pieces per day against Musk after he announced his intent to acquire twitter is now running a hit piece against Tesla with a misleading title.

JaimeThompson 4y ago
How is the title misleading?
- throw457 4y ago
  It's misleading because it doesn't fit their Agenda.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- darkwater 4y ago
  I would say that the wording used subtly implies that it is a negative thing. Using "less then a year" signals, to me, that the number is high for a short amount of time. (being behind a paywall I cannot read the full article to judge if it is actually misleading based on that)
- shawabawa3 4y ago
  It's misleading because it's a number of crashes that sounds bad, but there's no way of knowing if that's true from the headline if you haven't got a bunch of car statistics memorised A less misleading title would be "Tesla autopilot involved in 70% of driving-assistance accidents this year" Even that is potentially misleading if Tesla autopilot represents more than 70% of driver assisted miles on the road
  - freemint 4y ago
    Not matter what way the headline would have been phrased people would have complained. "Company X lost $money ..." headlines are printed all the time. To me it doesn't look like unfair reporting but instead i see a group of people accusing with loaded language ("hit pieces" is loaded) normal reporting to be biased against Musk because "daddy can't be wrong" and criticism must there for be an attack.
prmoustache 4y ago
I am not sure what is misleading in the title. What is missing however is the percentage of crash per amount of cars registered with and without assistance equipment and per brand. I have no way from this article to know if it fare better or worse than other brands and/or traditionnally operated cars.

JaimeThompson 4y ago

How is the title misleading?

throw457 4y ago
It's misleading because it doesn't fit their Agenda.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
darkwater 4y ago
I would say that the wording used subtly implies that it is a negative thing. Using "less then a year" signals, to me, that the number is high for a short amount of time. (being behind a paywall I cannot read the full article to judge if it is actually misleading based on that)
shawabawa3 4y ago
It's misleading because it's a number of crashes that sounds bad, but there's no way of knowing if that's true from the headline if you haven't got a bunch of car statistics memorised A less misleading title would be "Tesla autopilot involved in 70% of driving-assistance accidents this year" Even that is potentially misleading if Tesla autopilot represents more than 70% of driver assisted miles on the road
- freemint 4y ago
  Not matter what way the headline would have been phrased people would have complained. "Company X lost $money ..." headlines are printed all the time. To me it doesn't look like unfair reporting but instead i see a group of people accusing with loaded language ("hit pieces" is loaded) normal reporting to be biased against Musk because "daddy can't be wrong" and criticism must there for be an attack.

prmoustache 4y ago

I am not sure what is misleading in the title. What is missing however is the percentage of crash per amount of cars registered with and without assistance equipment and per brand. I have no way from this article to know if it fare better or worse than other brands and/or traditionnally operated cars.