I'd like to start by saying I am in no way complaining about HJ's rules. This is an exceedingly useful website, and whatever needs to be done to make sure it isn't shut down I am in favour of.
However, the thought occurred to me: What about journalists (including HJ himself) who slate a car? Do the car manufacturers sign a waiver as they hand the keys to the press car over giving the journos permission to write whatever they like?
Would the manufacturer ever have recourse to sueing a journo if they felt they had been libelled?
|
Think it comes down to the report being objective in the way it's written. e.g the person couldn't just say that Vectra's are a pile of rubbish - they'd have to justify it with examples from the car they tested, on that day, in those conditions, which is what they usually do. Done in this way, there is no comeback for the manufacturer.
It's very rare than a journalist reviewing anything will totally slate a product, as it jeopardises their future relationship with the manufacturer, and furthermore any advertising that manufacturer takes with their publication.
|
Well apart from JC and vectras :-) Oh and most of the motoring press and the city rover! I am not sure manufacturers can claim complete ignorance of a car's faults and would find it difficult to start suing people for their opinion. They probably know just how good a car is and when it is just a tarted up heap of doo-doos to make do until an improved model can be produced.
If motoring journalists don't give objective reviews then people don't buy their publications and advertising revenue falls that way. One manufacturer getting the hump probably won't make much of a dent and the publication will probably gain in advertising from a direct competitor of the manufacturer with the proverbial.
teabelly
|
|
As with, say, theatre reviews, every published car test boils down to one writer's opinion, some being more reliable than others and not pretending to "entertain" the reader (e.g. Clarkson). Like the uttered and written words of politicians, few sensible members of the public treat them as gospel. I don't believe motor makers are too worried about a "poor" write-up... and may even be more concerned about the real-life opinions that come up so regularly on this splendid site.
|
|
|
|
Its simple - here at least.
You may not identify someone you are accusing of dishonesty or a dishonest act. And, by the way, the following would all identify Tesco and would be uacceptable;
The supermarket which advert x
The supermarket with a name which rhymes with Fresco
Tesc0 or T3sco
etc.
You may know that what you say is true; I do not know this. Neither am I prepared to put the amount of effort in which would be required for me to know you were being truthful.
You may know that they have lost a court case over it - usually I do not know this.
And, of course, the all-purpose catch-all - You may not say something which I consider may cause the website trouble.
You may say that you do not like something. You may even say that you think it is rubbish - my views on the Freelander would be an example. You may say that you find it awful or that you would never buy it. On the whole opinions that are clearly that, are usually acceptable.
If you wish to give a negative message about a vendor, I find that the following phrase works well enough; "I would not recommend supplier X and will happily supply more details by e-mail".
And I think you'll find that Suzuki sued both journalists and a consumer organisation over their allegedly falling over jeep.
Finally, to sum up, anything that I feel will cause the website difficulties or extra work, of something which I think might do that, will get removed. Generally I follow the principles I've stated above, but if I have a doubt I always err on the side of caution.
|
Cheers Mark
Not really made myself clear though I think. rather than asking why this web-site needs to be so careful, I think I was more asking how the journalists get away with not being so careful.
With the Suzuki you've given an example which shows they're certainly not immune.
|
As a former motoring correspondent, I can assure you that car tests by reputable journalists tell it as they find it.
Sometimes relations with a manufacturer's Press Relations department might be strained for a while if there has been particularly strong criticism, but in general the PR people know what's written is generally both accurate and fair. No one makes it up you know..:-)
The tests and views to avoid are those written in local and freebie newspapers, where the advertising staff are known to lean on the editorial department not to upset car sales advertisers.
Any journalists, whatever their subject, working for a proper newspaper with an editor who backs his staff know that, providing whatever is written is factually correct and not libellous, they will be given full support.
A classic example was in 1990 when Ford brought out the then new Escort - almost to a man/woman the motoring hacks pulled it to pieces.
Ford didn't like it but buckled down, spent £1bn and a year or two later brought out a far superior vehicle. As one hack commented at the time: "Ford were unhappy, but they wouldn't have been as unhappy as someone who bought the car if I'd written a "glowing" test report."
|
As a former motoring correspondent, I can assure you that car tests by reputable journalists tell it as they find it.
D'you know, my other car's a space rocket? ;-)
Just compare the way a motoring journalists writes about a new car with the way a political journalist writes about a new policy.
Most motoring journalists write in a sort of code: glowingly high praise is the norm, with a few minor criticims allowed to creep in if the car is utterly dire.
With a few honourable exceptions, car reviews are about as impartial as one would expect from writers whose access to the product (and to freebies) is wholly dependant on remaining in the good books of the manufacturer.
|
Some journalists appear to be journalists pure and simple. Being able to do J turns, or to win races, does not prove that you know anything about cars. While waiting in the showroom for my car to be serviced I read an article by one prominent journalist, it was stuck on the wall (the article, that is). The article was two thirds about himself, with the rest a few general comments on how anonymous the car is.
They only seem to want to ride in the top of the range, and not the big sellers.
|
...I can't remember which magazine it was but I seem to remember that one of the motoring magazines had 'driving impressions' of a manufacturers concept/mock-up that there was no way they could have driven!
|
|
|
|
Yeah - we need a journo who says what he thinks. One who is prepared to ridicule a car if he really thinks its rubbish. One who'se career is sufficiently well established to ride the flak.
On who is brave enough to face down the patriotic but blinkered views of others and slate cars like the Scorpio, the Vectra, the 75, the Cityrover...
Step forward Jeremy ... oh err...
;o)
|
|
|
>>D'you know, my other car's a space rocket? ;-)
Your assumption in this case is the same as your general conception of motoring journalists.
I write as someone with more than 40 years' experience in journalism, including 15 years as the MC for one of the UK's best selling evening newspapers.
A car is normally someone's second most expensive purchase and that's why any road test should tell it as it is.
If you are as wise and knowledgeable as you seem to believe you are, then you should have learned by now to sort out the genuine journalists from the small time operators (often employed by an advertising department to write copy that satisfies advertisers) and rely on their judgement.
It's the same philosophy with any reviews of consumer products - cars are not an exception.
I know I used to have occasional confrontations with the advertising department heads, who made it clear that car sales advertisers were sometimes unhappy about what was written about certain models and threatening to withdraw their advertising.
However I had an editor who stood up firmly for editorial freedom, backed me to the hilt and, apart from one instance, advertising was never withdrawn. Even then the advertiser was back in double quick time after realising sales had gone down as a result.
Re driving impressions. These are normally written by MCs after going on a new car's Press launch, usually held some time before the model hits the showrooms and done in pre-production or even European specification vehicles.
A manufacturer will naturally wish to gain maximum publicity when the car first goes on sale, so driving impressions are just that and published some time prior to showroom sales commencing.
They are intended as an brief appetiser and full road tests are usually published around the time of the car going on sale or shortly afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
