Quote:
Originally Posted by homerunball
Politics, money, and if the Project manager at Honda buys the editor of C&D a drink, the next review is somewhat favorable.
|
I think most of your comments in this thread have been right on the, um, ball, but I have to take issue with this one. I've been to auto show press days and press trips, and, while automakers do generally provide nice food (and occasionally free adult beverages) in an attempt to generate favorable feelings about their cars, I sincerely doubt there are many journalists out there who would write a glowing review of a crappy car simply because he really liked the shrimp cocktail at the press launch.
Also, if you're going to make a case that car magazine writers are bought and sold like politicians,
Car and Driver seems like a particularly bad example. They'll rip a car to shreds even if that manufacturer has ads in the very issue where the shredding occurs. Yes, Honda, BMW, Mazda, Nissan, and Porsche, tend to win a lot of their comparison tests, but this isn't because C/D has an economic interest in any of these brands, it's because these companies tend to sell cars that are fun to drive. And there are plenty of exceptions. If they were really "owned" by Honda, for example, why is it the Civic never wins their comparisons yet Accords often do? Similarly, why does the 3 Series usually win, but the 5 and 7 often don't?
If anything, I would say some publications just aren't very critical at all, but not any less so for one make versus another. I haven't read
Motor Trend in a long time (and I hear it has improved), but there was a time it read like a brochure to me. Boring and hardly ever seriously critical--for all cars. I'll grant you that I have heard much speculation that their Car of the Year trophy really was given to the highest bidder, but in general, I think they just had an editorial policy to write generally favorable reviews and downplay the negatives.
Anyway, I've not naive enough to think that any industry is immune to corruption, I just think your statement was unjustified.
-Dan