Brodergate: "low-grade ethics violation"

Update 8 :

http://insideevs.com/teslas-musk-still-striking-back-at-falsified-new-york-times-model-s-review/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“I would call it a low-grade ethics violation. Not a Jayson Blair-crazy-fabrication variety, but I would call it low-grade. It was not in good faith—that’s an important point.”

Click to expand...

Update 7 :

Musk : "New York Times debacle may have cost Tesla $100 million"

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/02/26/musk-says-new-york-times-debacle-may-have-cost-tesla-100/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Update 6 :

After a Charging System Test, a Debate Erupts Online

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/automobiles/after-a-charging-system-test-a-debate-erupts-online.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A largely biased look from NYT quoting various bits from around the web.

Update 5 :

Elon gets #Cobbed.

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/02/21/teslas-elon-musk-final-thoughts-nyt-spat-twitter-flame/#continued" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Update 4 :

NYT's public editor gives her final verdict.

http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/18/problems-with-precision-and-judgment-but-not-integrity-in-tesla-test/#more-3373" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looks like she just took it on faith that Broder started in good faith but made mistakes. But she ducks a lot of questions.

I could recite chapter and verse of the test drive, the decisions made along the way, the cabin temperature of the car, the cruise control setting and so on. I don’t think that’s useful here.

People will go on contesting these points – and insisting that they know what they prove — and that’s understandable. In the matter of the Tesla Model S and its now infamous test drive, there is still plenty to argue about and few conclusions that are unassailable.

Click to expand...

Update 3 :

Tesla S owners will attempt a similar drive as NYT's Broder this weekend. Follow them on @TeslaRoadTrip

Update 2 :

CNN just made the same drive easily. http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/15/autos/tesla-model-s/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Video : http://bit.ly/petercnnvideo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Update 1 : Broder responds

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/that-tesla-data-what-it-says-and-what-it-doesnt/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/conflicting-assertions-over-an-electric-car-test-drive/?smid=tw-share" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Let me get this out of the way up front: This blog post will not be the definitive word on the contentious subject of a Times article in Sunday’s Automobiles section. It’s just an early effort to put some claims and counterclaims out there, while I continue to look into it.
...
Mr. Musk has not returned my call, made at about noon on Thursday. I eventually intend to ask him to fully release and “open source” the driving logs, along with whatever other data might be necessary for better understanding and interpretation.

Click to expand...

Earlier thread : http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=11524" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

aside from Chelsea's early column (which perhaps someone else will link to), here is the best take on this NYTimes article on Tesla:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1082296_teslas-elon-musk-ny-times-disturbing-discrepancies-on-model-s-range-reporting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

thankyouOB said:

aside from Chelsea's early column (which perhaps someone else will link to), here is the best take on this NYTimes article on Tesla:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1082296_teslas-elon-musk-ny-times-disturbing-discrepancies-on-model-s-range-reporting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Click to expand...

Very good report, thanks for linking it!

thankyouOB said:

aside from Chelsea's early column (which perhaps someone else will link to), here is the best take on this NYTimes article on Tesla:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1082296_teslas-elon-musk-ny-times-disturbing-discrepancies-on-model-s-range-reporting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Click to expand...

This one?

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/02/tesla-vs-new-york-times-when-range-anxiety-leads-to-road-trip-rage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

btw, i thought her summation at the end was spot on.

According to an ABG comment, CNN is doing the same route right now. That story should come out in a day or so.

It would be interesting if multiple media outlets try the route successfully - that would further embarrass NYT.

%40 of the outstanding shares in TSLA are shorted. There are massive short positions, and they have been getting creamed lately, as the stock has been steadily rising. The list of "suspects" is long, big oil, the "ICE" automotive industry (millions of jobs at stake), TSLA short position holders... more people want Tesla to fail, than to succeed, really.

Click to expand...

I think it was the man on the grassy knoll.

it will also further embarrass the NYT if they get more letters to the editor. here is mine:

"Dear Editor, I read "Stalled On the EV Highway" with great concern. After reading his article and then looking over the car's log data released by Tesla Motors, I am shocked to find that you would hire someone with such an apparent lack of journalistic integrity. It appears that Broder repeatedly unplugged the car before it was done charging, drove it more and charged it less and then finally, when it wouldn't die, attempted to run it out of electricity by driving in circles in a parking lot, all to prove electric vehicles are a waste of time and money and aren't ready for prime time. I surely hope you investigate this occurrence and promptly retract the article and fire Broder if you find evidence to substantiate Tesla's claims: http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
My long standing faith in the NYT's has been shaken by this."

evnow said:

According to an ABG comment, CNN is doing the same route right now. That story should come out in a day or so.

It would be interesting if multiple media outlets try the route successfully - that would further embarrass NYT.

Click to expand...

This Atlantic story is trying to say why Tesla's interpretation is wrong.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/02/elon-musks-data-doesnt-back-his-claims-new-york-times-fakery/62149/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The reporter looks like a noob - knows nothing about EVs (thinks if the DTE is 0, the car shouldn't move).

Deleted

I think we can expect the NYT to issue a similar piece to the one in the Atlantic Wire. Essentially saying that Musk took their writing too literally, that this was not a scientific article, that they had no bias and did not attempt to fake the outcome, that a few minor errors crept in for which they are sorry, but that the overall arc of the story was correct.

smkettner said:

He is no nooby working for the NYT. 19 yo intern maybe but not this guy.

Click to expand...

I'm talking about Rebecca who wrote the Atlantic story.

BTW, it is nice to finally read an article where commenters blast the reporter for not knowing enough about EVs - than the usual nonsense comments we see about EVs.

Oh, this just gets more and more interesting. I've read the various Green Car Reports etc. articles as well as the Atlantic Wire partial rebuttal. Will the NYT/Broder call or fold?

evnow said:

This Atlantic story is trying to say why Tesla's interpretation is wrong.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/02/elon-musks-data-doesnt-back-his-claims-new-york-times-fakery/62149/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The reporter looks like a noob - knows nothing about EVs (thinks if the DTE is 0, the car shouldn't move).

Click to expand...

Oh, boy.

Broder also explains that he did not charge fully because of the time it took to charge. He wanted to show the real world experience of a real driver, who might not want to endure the hour and a half it takes to charge up, when only needing a certain amount of energy to get to point B.

Click to expand...

There it is. The "Top Gear Defense". He only wanted to show what would have happened if he were an idiot.

Nubo said:

evnow said:

This Atlantic story is trying to say why Tesla's interpretation is wrong.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/02/elon-musks-data-doesnt-back-his-claims-new-york-times-fakery/62149/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The reporter looks like a noob - knows nothing about EVs (thinks if the DTE is 0, the car shouldn't move).

Click to expand...

Oh, boy.

Click to expand...

Question, what does a BA in Political Science with three years of professional experience as web producer and writer know about EVs? Enough to know how to parse data logs or to ascertain how an unplanned jaunt to Manhattan can affect your range when the heater is blasting? Welcome to the future. Traditional journalism is dead, and we are all just bloggers.

Nubo said:

There it is. The "Top Gear Defense". He only wanted to show what would have happened if he were an idiot.

Click to expand...

I'm not getting your point. His position is sensible. Why wait around after you have the range you need? You seem to be saying that if I have thirty miles of range left, and I'm only going 15 miles, that if I have the opportunity I should stop at a parking lot and charge up to 100%, just to be sure. I'm in this situation frequently and it has never occurred to me to stop. If I have enough range to get to where I'm going I'm not stopping. Truth be told, I'd rather be home than in a parking lot. If that's being an idiot then I'm guilty.

How was he to know that 90 miles was going to turn into 13 miles (or whatever it ended up being)? I would never have expected that. Maybe some decrease in range but not anything approaching 50% much less 75%.

The Top Gear defense was that Top Gear is entertainment not journalism, and faking things is part of being entertaining.

SanDust said:

... How was he to know that 90 miles was going to turn into 13 miles (or whatever it ended up being)? I would never have expected that. Maybe some decrease in range but not anything approaching 50% much less 75%. ...

Click to expand...

That sounds like the question to me. What did the car say vs. how far he had to go. The Musk blog article says, "The final leg of his trip was 61 miles and yet he disconnected the charge cable when the range display stated 32 miles." If that's true, he sabotaged himself on purpose.

Reposting this from our Facebook group. Peter Valdes-Dapena, a CNN reporter, is doing the same trip and tweeting about the experience. There are reportedly two people in traveling in the car, which should make fact finding easier than it was in John's solo trip.


Click to open

have you read any of Broder's other articles. there is no defending someone who has a hard and fast opinion about something and goes about proving himself right... that is just not journalism in my book! As for cutting it close. yeah, lots of people cut it close, every day and end up on the side of the road and get no mention in such articles. As with gas cars, driving style, weather and accessory use effect range. Most folks I know like to have a little extra in the tank because calculating the sum effect of all those factors is difficult. the first day or two I had an EV I was very conservative till I understood it's limits.

SanDust said:

Nubo said:

There it is. The "Top Gear Defense". He only wanted to show what would have happened if he were an idiot.

Click to expand...

I'm not getting your point. His position is sensible. Why wait around after you have the range you need? You seem to be saying that if I have thirty miles of range left, and I'm only going 15 miles, that if I have the opportunity I should stop at a parking lot and charge up to 100%, just to be sure. I'm in this situation frequently and it has never occurred to me to stop. If I have enough range to get to where I'm going I'm not stopping. Truth be told, I'd rather be home than in a parking lot. If that's being an idiot then I'm guilty.

How was he to know that 90 miles was going to turn into 13 miles (or whatever it ended up being)? I would never have expected that. Maybe some decrease in range but not anything approaching 50% much less 75%.

The Top Gear defense was that Top Gear is entertainment not journalism, and faking things is part of being entertaining.

Click to expand...

I predict an out-of-work journalist. He knew he would draw a lot of attention with this piece, but probably didn't count on highly specific data logs. He should give Top Gear a call to see if they are hiring.

SanDust said:

Nubo said:

There it is. The "Top Gear Defense". He only wanted to show what would have happened if he were an idiot.

Click to expand...

I'm not getting your point. His position is sensible. Why wait around after you have the range you need?

Click to expand...

Because he was at a superstation, the ideal place to pick up charge and just a few more minutes would have avoided putting himself into a situation with barely enough range, which turned out to be barely not enough range. Since he was eschewing "lesser" charge stations, for other allegedly "reporterly" reasons, a flying comparison is more apt than a driving one. He "took off" with a bare minimum fuel load, with no reserve and no alternates.

You seem to be saying that if I have thirty miles of range left, and I'm only going 15 miles, that if I have the opportunity I should stop at a parking lot and charge up to 100%, just to be sure.

Click to expand...

Not at all. First of all, you've familiarized yourself well enough to know how your vehicle reacts and how to achieve the result. Secondly your example has twice the needed range; he was on the margin. And (presumably) new to the game. And, finally the issue wasn't comparable to charging a LEAF from 15% to 100%. He could have had a proper reserve in just a few minutes.

I'm in this situation frequently and it has never occurred to me to stop. If I have enough range to get to where I'm going I'm not stopping. Truth be told, I'd rather be home than in a parking lot. If that's being an idiot then I'm guilty.

Click to expand...

You're not being an idiot because you KNOW you have enough range. If you ended on a flatbed when you could have charged a few minutes longer, then you'd be an idiot.

How was he to know that 90 miles was going to turn into 13 miles (or whatever it ended up being)? I would never have expected that. Maybe some decrease in range but not anything approaching 50% much less 75%.

Click to expand...

As others have noted, this is a topic of discussion on the Tesla forum. I'd be surprised if the reporter did not discover this. If I were in his shoes, I certainly would have done some research, wouldn't you? Given the other aspects of his trip my suspicion is that he DID know what was going to happen. And even if we give him the benefit of the doubt he still embarked the next morning with not enough range, against (according to Musk) EXPLICIT recommendation not to do so.

The Top Gear defense was that Top Gear is entertainment not journalism, and faking things is part of being entertaining.

Click to expand...

Their defense was also "We wanted to show what would happen if you DID run out of battery", like an idiot.