3 ms·

Yes, they could have referenced someone who did fact the fact checking. But even worse is that they didn't ask him for the claim report from the insurance comp

Yes, they could have referenced someone who did fact the fact checking. But even worse is that they didn't ask him for the claim report from the insurance company.

dragontamer 3y ago
> Jain is one of tens of thousands of Tesla owners who have experienced premature failures of suspension or steering parts, according to a Reuters review of thousands of Tesla documents. The chronic failures, many in relatively new vehicles, date back at least seven years and stretch across Tesla’s model lineup and across the globe, from China to the United States to Europe, according to the records and interviews with more than 20 customers and nine former Tesla managers or service technicians. Reuters cites official documents reviewed by Reuters staff, 20+ interviews with customers and 9+ interviews with managers or service technicians. That... seems quite comprehensive to me? They've got customer-side, they've got insurance side, they've even got Tesla's side here. How much more evidence or citations do you want from a story like this?
ahahahahah 3y ago
> Yes, they could have referenced someone who did fact the fact checking. Yes, that would be a good thing to do. Here's some quotes from the article: > A Tesla owner received a $14,000 repair bill for a day-one issue with his Model Y, Reuters reported. > Reuters found that Tesla had faced thousands of complaints over suspension and steering issues. > Jain told Reuters ... > The Reuters investigation — which cited interviews with more than 20 customers and 9 Tesla workers, as well as thousands of internal documents I guess it'd have been possible for them to explain more that Reuters had done the investigation.
rsynnott 3y ago
They do link to the Reuters piece. The BI piece doesn’t really contextualise it well, and I’d agree that linking to the Reuters piece would better, but it doesn’t seem that egregious. (I suspect that the reason the BI piece exists and is linked to in the first place is that the Reuters piece is _very long_, and a lot of people won’t have the patience to read it.)

Yes, they could have referenced someone who did fact the fact checking. But even worse is that they didn't ask him for the claim report from the insurance company.

dragontamer 3y ago

> Jain is one of tens of thousands of Tesla owners who have experienced premature failures of suspension or steering parts, according to a Reuters review of thousands of Tesla documents. The chronic failures, many in relatively new vehicles, date back at least seven years and stretch across Tesla’s model lineup and across the globe, from China to the United States to Europe, according to the records and interviews with more than 20 customers and nine former Tesla managers or service technicians. Reuters cites official documents reviewed by Reuters staff, 20+ interviews with customers and 9+ interviews with managers or service technicians. That... seems quite comprehensive to me? They've got customer-side, they've got insurance side, they've even got Tesla's side here. How much more evidence or citations do you want from a story like this?

ahahahahah 3y ago

> Yes, they could have referenced someone who did fact the fact checking. Yes, that would be a good thing to do. Here's some quotes from the article: > A Tesla owner received a $14,000 repair bill for a day-one issue with his Model Y, Reuters reported. > Reuters found that Tesla had faced thousands of complaints over suspension and steering issues. > Jain told Reuters ... > The Reuters investigation — which cited interviews with more than 20 customers and 9 Tesla workers, as well as thousands of internal documents I guess it'd have been possible for them to explain more that Reuters had done the investigation.

rsynnott 3y ago

They do link to the Reuters piece. The BI piece doesn’t really contextualise it well, and I’d agree that linking to the Reuters piece would better, but it doesn’t seem that egregious. (I suspect that the reason the BI piece exists and is linked to in the first place is that the Reuters piece is _very long_, and a lot of people won’t have the patience to read it.)