5 ms·

"reads like Broder was trying to stack the deck" I disagree. I think Broder is doing what a lot of journalists do and has accentuated the overall negative expe

"reads like Broder was trying to stack the deck" I disagree. I think Broder is doing what a lot of journalists do and has accentuated the overall negative experience to create a better narrative. In spite of the poor communication and slight exaggeration, I don't feel like there was malice or a great deal of intent on Broder's behalf. He generally had a poor experience. The errors in his story do not negate that, and I don't get the impression that he had intentionally stacked the deck against the car. Musk on the other hand has intentionally implied that Broder lied and was possibly motivated by a hatred of the Tesla concept. That is a ridiculous assertion to make by someone in his position. The data does not back that up. Musk should have just presented the facts and let us interpret them.

andrewfelix 14y ago
If you're going to downvote this, at least have the courtesy to respond.
- wtallis 14y ago
  You say that it's not "stacking the deck" for Broder to exaggerate for the sake of a better narrative, but that Musk should have given us just the facts. That's absolutely bullshit. If you think it's okay for Broder to editorialize, then at the very least Musk should be allowed to argue against it. After all, Broder's supposed to be a journalist, held to higher standards than Top Gear.
  - andrewfelix 14y ago
    As mentioned a lot of journalists will attempt to create a narrative. They need to capture the readers interest with a compelling read. If all Broder did was compile a list of facts, he wouldn't be writing for the NYT. Musk is not in that position. He's the CEO of a company, not a writer. I think his argument would have had more impact had he not implied that Broder had a secret agenda.
    - gillianseed 14y ago
      If he ignores/distorts the facts in order to 'create a narrative' then he is not reporting, he is writing fiction.
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
tubbo 14y ago
This guy (Broder) was clearly too stupid to use the car. Jesus Christ, I mean...I can't even get to Newark from Connecticut on a full tank of gas! What the fuck was he thinking? I'm sorry but the stakes are too high here to assume anything otherwise. Someone is obviously being paid to make the review as shitty as possible, even though the Tesla Model S has clearly over-achieved its goals.
redm 14y ago
> In spite of the poor communication and slight exaggeration, I don't feel like there was malice or a great deal of intent on Broder's behalf. He generally had a poor experience. I don't know much about electric cars, but I do know this: They aren't great for long distrance driving. I have no doubt that Broder had a bad experience. When it's 10 degrees outside, I don't want to turn off the climate control. When I'm driving between cities, I don't want to stop at gas stations for over an hour. The list goes on. This test was all about driving longer distances using fast (cough) charging stations. It seems clear to me no matter how you cut this up that the experience, compared to a gas powered vehicle was lousy. Who the hell wants to wait 1.5 hours at a gast station? Tesla sounds great for driving around your city but I wouldn't think twice about buying one if I was driving great distances.
- dclowd9901 14y ago
  Right? While everyone's arguing about who's right, I can't help but think this is THE LAST car I'd ever want to take on a long trip. Ten minutes at a station is far longer than I could humanely accept, let alone hours (in a best case scenario no less!). If I ever buy an EV, it'll be a simple grocery getter, and that's it.
- kamaal 14y ago
  >>They aren't great for long distrance driving. Sorry to be giving a negative opinion on electric cars. But hours together of charging, unpredictable battery performance, high prices of cars. This just doesn't seem right. Electric cars just aren't ready yet.
- clauretano 14y ago
  Especially when driving in the DC - Boston corridor, where there's high speed (by U.S. standards anyway) rail.
- drbawb 14y ago
  >when it's 10 degrees outside. Not too long ago we had a week or so of 0-10deg [F] weather in the midwest, and my _petrol_ car didn't give me heat for most of my commutes. What little heat I did have, I voluntarily left to the engine so it could get up to temp [knowing this is better for my car, and my emissions]. If it's going to be that cold, I bring an extra pair of socks and gloves. I don't blame my car that I _know_ is struggling to keep itself at operating temperature. Not to mention, he had heated the cabin up to 74degF prior to that; no journalist can reasonably expect me to believe that a _brand new_ luxury electric car has worse insulation than an 01 Camry with cracked weather seals on the rear doors. I'm sorry, but unless you didn't read the weather report and packed shorts and t-shirts, there is no way that 10degF ambient temp, in a well sealed cabin that has previously been heated to 72degF, is "white knuckle" weather. --- I certainly agree with you, and with what I think was the larger point of Broder's review: this is not a _no compromises car_, even CNN's reviewer said that he had a bit of range anxiety on the longest leg. Charging for an hour is a _compromise_, and criticizing it is well deserved. A photo-op of the Model S on a flatbed truck, saying it broke down? That's no longer fairly deserved criticism: especially when you pulled out of a station with 32mi. of est. range for embarking on a 61mi. trip _knowing_ the battery was having range problems b/c of the weather. That being said, considering this is a performance oriented car, I think the mileage was quite remarkable for an all electric vehicle. I'm honestly impressed, and I'm a petrolhead. Once the fast-charge network is a bit more built-up? I can easily see myself planning long road-trips around it. -- On vacations we regularly spend 30-45 minutes at a filling station between tanks. Not because we _have to_, but because we need to stretch our legs, rotate seats, eat lunch, buy more snacks, maybe pick up a book, double check routes and reservations, etc. etc. I don't think an hour at a station that has plenty of amenities is unreasonable for 200+mi. legs.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
onemorepassword 14y ago
I agree that this is what journalists do. It's also why the public stops trusting journalists, especially after they've personally experienced this. It's what the rest of us calls "lying". This may not be an example of individual malice, but it is definitely an example of why journalism that still uses practices that pre-date video, let alone the internet, no longer commands any kind of respect. Broder lied "because that's what journalists do". Think about that.
- andrewfelix 14y ago
  I wouldn't characterise it as lying. Broder constructed a narrative around his experience, and got a couple of the details wrong.
  - onemorepassword 14y ago
    This is the expectation mismatch between journalism and its dwindling audience: the general public doesn't expect journalists to "construct a narrative". Most people expect journalism to be about the cold hard facts, possibly biased in it's tone and interpretation, but not altering the facts in favor of a narrative. Manipulating quotes is another journalistic favorite, because hey, just because it's between quotation marks doesn't mean they literally said that... In the real world, that is called "lying and deceiving", unless it's marked "fiction" (or "advertising"). Every time people find out the truth doesn't match the reports, journalism loses a little more respect, but for some insane reason journalists insist on maintaining this completely outdated practice that is no longer justifiable in today's world of video, audio and instant global communication. And of course, logs...
    - andrewfelix 14y ago
      You make very good points. But I think to be fair to Broder who operates within the context that he does, he was not out of line. I do agree that the nature of news is changing as are readers expectations.
      - deleted 14y ago
RyanMcGreal 14y ago
> Broder should have just presented the facts and let us interpret them. Fixed. A journalist's job is to present the facts as fairly and accurately as possible, not to massage (and sometimes distort) the facts into a narrative that triggers an emotional reaction. If anything, I expect the CEO of a company to bend the facts into a story, but I expect the journalist covering that company to unbend those facts, not to bend them the other way.
jonob7 14y ago
Broder went in with a preconceived notion, and did everything in his power to make that notion come true.
prawks 14y ago
> accentuated the overall negative experience to create a better narrative I think that's pretty much what "stacking the deck" means.
Alterlife 14y ago
> Musk should have just presented the facts and let us interpret them. That's what journalists are supposed to do. Musk on the other hand is expected to defend / market his product as well as he is capable.

andrewfelix 14y ago

If you're going to downvote this, at least have the courtesy to respond.

wtallis 14y ago
You say that it's not "stacking the deck" for Broder to exaggerate for the sake of a better narrative, but that Musk should have given us just the facts. That's absolutely bullshit. If you think it's okay for Broder to editorialize, then at the very least Musk should be allowed to argue against it. After all, Broder's supposed to be a journalist, held to higher standards than Top Gear.
- andrewfelix 14y ago
  As mentioned a lot of journalists will attempt to create a narrative. They need to capture the readers interest with a compelling read. If all Broder did was compile a list of facts, he wouldn't be writing for the NYT. Musk is not in that position. He's the CEO of a company, not a writer. I think his argument would have had more impact had he not implied that Broder had a secret agenda.
  - gillianseed 14y ago
    If he ignores/distorts the facts in order to 'create a narrative' then he is not reporting, he is writing fiction.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]

tubbo 14y ago

This guy (Broder) was clearly too stupid to use the car. Jesus Christ, I mean...I can't even get to Newark from Connecticut on a full tank of gas! What the fuck was he thinking? I'm sorry but the stakes are too high here to assume anything otherwise. Someone is obviously being paid to make the review as shitty as possible, even though the Tesla Model S has clearly over-achieved its goals.

redm 14y ago

> In spite of the poor communication and slight exaggeration, I don't feel like there was malice or a great deal of intent on Broder's behalf. He generally had a poor experience. I don't know much about electric cars, but I do know this: They aren't great for long distrance driving. I have no doubt that Broder had a bad experience. When it's 10 degrees outside, I don't want to turn off the climate control. When I'm driving between cities, I don't want to stop at gas stations for over an hour. The list goes on. This test was all about driving longer distances using fast (cough) charging stations. It seems clear to me no matter how you cut this up that the experience, compared to a gas powered vehicle was lousy. Who the hell wants to wait 1.5 hours at a gast station? Tesla sounds great for driving around your city but I wouldn't think twice about buying one if I was driving great distances.

dclowd9901 14y ago
Right? While everyone's arguing about who's right, I can't help but think this is THE LAST car I'd ever want to take on a long trip. Ten minutes at a station is far longer than I could humanely accept, let alone hours (in a best case scenario no less!). If I ever buy an EV, it'll be a simple grocery getter, and that's it.
kamaal 14y ago
>>They aren't great for long distrance driving. Sorry to be giving a negative opinion on electric cars. But hours together of charging, unpredictable battery performance, high prices of cars. This just doesn't seem right. Electric cars just aren't ready yet.
clauretano 14y ago
Especially when driving in the DC - Boston corridor, where there's high speed (by U.S. standards anyway) rail.
drbawb 14y ago
>when it's 10 degrees outside. Not too long ago we had a week or so of 0-10deg [F] weather in the midwest, and my _petrol_ car didn't give me heat for most of my commutes. What little heat I did have, I voluntarily left to the engine so it could get up to temp [knowing this is better for my car, and my emissions]. If it's going to be that cold, I bring an extra pair of socks and gloves. I don't blame my car that I _know_ is struggling to keep itself at operating temperature. Not to mention, he had heated the cabin up to 74degF prior to that; no journalist can reasonably expect me to believe that a _brand new_ luxury electric car has worse insulation than an 01 Camry with cracked weather seals on the rear doors. I'm sorry, but unless you didn't read the weather report and packed shorts and t-shirts, there is no way that 10degF ambient temp, in a well sealed cabin that has previously been heated to 72degF, is "white knuckle" weather. --- I certainly agree with you, and with what I think was the larger point of Broder's review: this is not a _no compromises car_, even CNN's reviewer said that he had a bit of range anxiety on the longest leg. Charging for an hour is a _compromise_, and criticizing it is well deserved. A photo-op of the Model S on a flatbed truck, saying it broke down? That's no longer fairly deserved criticism: especially when you pulled out of a station with 32mi. of est. range for embarking on a 61mi. trip _knowing_ the battery was having range problems b/c of the weather. That being said, considering this is a performance oriented car, I think the mileage was quite remarkable for an all electric vehicle. I'm honestly impressed, and I'm a petrolhead. Once the fast-charge network is a bit more built-up? I can easily see myself planning long road-trips around it. -- On vacations we regularly spend 30-45 minutes at a filling station between tanks. Not because we _have to_, but because we need to stretch our legs, rotate seats, eat lunch, buy more snacks, maybe pick up a book, double check routes and reservations, etc. etc. I don't think an hour at a station that has plenty of amenities is unreasonable for 200+mi. legs.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

onemorepassword 14y ago

I agree that this is what journalists do. It's also why the public stops trusting journalists, especially after they've personally experienced this. It's what the rest of us calls "lying". This may not be an example of individual malice, but it is definitely an example of why journalism that still uses practices that pre-date video, let alone the internet, no longer commands any kind of respect. Broder lied "because that's what journalists do". Think about that.

andrewfelix 14y ago
I wouldn't characterise it as lying. Broder constructed a narrative around his experience, and got a couple of the details wrong.
- onemorepassword 14y ago
  This is the expectation mismatch between journalism and its dwindling audience: the general public doesn't expect journalists to "construct a narrative". Most people expect journalism to be about the cold hard facts, possibly biased in it's tone and interpretation, but not altering the facts in favor of a narrative. Manipulating quotes is another journalistic favorite, because hey, just because it's between quotation marks doesn't mean they literally said that... In the real world, that is called "lying and deceiving", unless it's marked "fiction" (or "advertising"). Every time people find out the truth doesn't match the reports, journalism loses a little more respect, but for some insane reason journalists insist on maintaining this completely outdated practice that is no longer justifiable in today's world of video, audio and instant global communication. And of course, logs...
  - andrewfelix 14y ago
    You make very good points. But I think to be fair to Broder who operates within the context that he does, he was not out of line. I do agree that the nature of news is changing as are readers expectations.
    - deleted 14y ago

RyanMcGreal 14y ago

> Broder should have just presented the facts and let us interpret them. Fixed. A journalist's job is to present the facts as fairly and accurately as possible, not to massage (and sometimes distort) the facts into a narrative that triggers an emotional reaction. If anything, I expect the CEO of a company to bend the facts into a story, but I expect the journalist covering that company to unbend those facts, not to bend them the other way.

jonob7 14y ago

Broder went in with a preconceived notion, and did everything in his power to make that notion come true.

prawks 14y ago

> accentuated the overall negative experience to create a better narrative I think that's pretty much what "stacking the deck" means.

Alterlife 14y ago

> Musk should have just presented the facts and let us interpret them. That's what journalists are supposed to do. Musk on the other hand is expected to defend / market his product as well as he is capable.