Journalism serves many purposes. The most important function is probably the dissemination of information; bringing information to the masses.
But that’s like going to church and praying for your sins, and then not actually repenting. That’s only nearly been there and nearly done it.
Journalism has only reached its highest echelons of purpose when it brings about a significant change in a directive; when a wrong has been rectified or a wrong-doer has met their justice.
Compared to the fields of health journalism or global journalism, automotive journalism acts as a proponent of the industry it is assigned to cover. This was the words from a BBC reporter talking about the Baby Peter tragedy;
“(Image of Baby P as the background) It was we know in the end, one Locum doctor, who could have saved Baby P, but she, like him was failed by the system. At this clinic (An image of St Ann’s Hospital as the background) she had no nurse to examine the child; there were few medical records, shortages of admin staff and long delays for appointments”. (BBC 2009)
That is a critical approach, with a fault-finding mechanism built into the report. With a background of a Care Quality Commission review, ‘Under-staffing’, ‘Inadequate training in child protection’ and ‘Poor communication’ were listed in white on a red background.
Now would you ever be able to get such a highly critical review in a car magazine or a car television programme? Probably not. BBC’s Top Gear quite occasionally manage to do it, but quiver under a banner of ‘we provide an entertaining segment on cars, everything should be taken with a inch of salt; this is not a factual documentary-style programme’ every time they get into a conflict, which they quite often do.
The science is not complex; most of the car manufacturers take special interest in seeing that the journalists are stuffed up to their necks with free caps, t-shirts, stays at nice hotels, and free airport transfers. And they expect the journalists to return the favour in their reviews.
The agenda
This paper aims to give its reader an insight into the workings of the automotive journalistic premise, and whether there’s too much of the ‘dangling carrot’ enticing the car reviewer. What it also hopes to prove is that automotive journalism, albeit saying nice things most of the time; is not putty in the hands of manufacturers. Sometimes suggestions made by the journalistic profession get cogs turning in the automobile industry, and lead to an improved product, this is the exemplification of journalism fulfilling its highest motives.
Nader’s ‘Unsafe at any speed’, the over enthusiastic – steering first generation Audi TT, the S-Class radar technology shame, and the A-class rollover are prime examples of the subject this paper covers, and will therefore be mentioned as suitable complementary examples.
Nader here not there
There’s the example of Ralph Nader, who was not an auto journalist but a Harvard and Princeton educated political activist. His research and subsequent shaming of General Motors (Nader 1965), made GM rear its ugly head. They even went as far as hiring prostitutes to photograph Nader in compromising situations.
This is journalism practiced to serve the people, to inform them and act as their voice. It’s a leveler of two sides of the economic equation; with the seemingly small and powerless consumer at one end of the scale and the apparently invincible big corporations at the other.
The other important and much more difficult role is the one where journalism acts as a catalyst for change. This is the kind of journalism that is stronger and the kind that brings journalism round full circle.
This type of journalism has the power to move, topple dictatorial governance and right wrongs that are committed by the powerful in a society. This is going to church, asking forgiveness for your sins, and then paying penance.
As stated at the beginning of this paper, automotive journalism has been a field where strong journalism is produced with a lesser impact, where criticism is rarely freely subjected to major manufacturers, and reflected in the consumer media. But is this concept changing?
Does the modern auto journalist have a stronger role to play in the car industry? Is he an independent authority, and not a reigned in pet of the car-manufacturer? Has he finally lost his side-kick image?
Rubbing salt into wounds
It’s not the same thing to criticize a Chinese manufacturer after they have come out of a crash test with their passenger compartment crushed like a wet paper bag. The same goes for the mocking of General Motors and the Chrysler Corporation after they’ve gone under. Now far too many economists and journalists know what should have been done, what went wrong, and even question how these corporations missed ‘the vital signs’?
The YouTube revolution sparked off a Chinese backlash, with their terrifically named Brilliance and Chery Amulet, performing terribly in crash tests. Of course, the internet has become the bastion of the consumer. Almost anybody with a video camera can become a journalist, and with its strong arrays into the consumer’s mindset, manufacturers are taking note. The latest Z4 is heavily advertised on YouTube; and positive reviews of a car are heavily backed by manufacturers.
This is not to say that the only role that professional journalists play is the friendly PR guy. Maybe it’s just that automotive journalism is practiced in a highly developed manner where criticisms are not closed ended.
Automotive journalism always seems to feature constructive journalism. If you dedicate a few minutes sifting through a car magazine you’d be hard-pressed to find out something like “The 2005 Ford Mustang handles badly.” Period. Without any mention of a corrective procedure to improve the car’s handling.
The Ford Mustang would’ve handled so much better if got rid of its cheap live axle system and got an independent McPherson setup. Now that’s criticism, but it’s not reduced to ridicule, but functions as a constructive guide, as seen in this road test report;
“We were sceptical about Ford’s use of a solid “live” axle out back rather than developing a more advanced independent rear suspension setup, but the reality is that most would-be buyers don’t want to pay for all that extra technology. And when one balances the ’05 Mustang’s low cost and excellent ride and handling ability with the lack of cutting-edge technology, it appears that Ford made the right decision.” (Kahn 2004)
The Edmunds Inside line also commented on the Mustangs’ solid rear axle;
“The powerful brakes are more fade resistant than before, and control in bumpy corners is improved, despite the continued use of a solid rear axle.” (Kahn 2004)
The automobile industry probably enjoys what many other fields of journalism don’t. Now measure an automotive journalist for interest and passion, and 9 times out of 10, he’d score very high. So it’s a decent deduction that the journalist is attached to his subject, and knows when a car handles poorly, and what needs to be done about it.
Teutonic problems with elks
There are a few instances when manufacturers listened to journalists and ‘corrected’ problems with their cars. Mercedes Benz, who are very ‘Tuetonically precise’ about their engineering seem to have become legend with 2 of their cars. And not because they tended to the needs of a demanding auto journalist, but because the auto-journalist suddenly had the power of a million ears tuned into his precious words and the smallest blunder would be magnified instantaneously.
The A-class and the infamous outcome of the Elk test in its launch year, and then the highly publicized S-class shambles did them no favours. But these gaffes are not here because it’s quite amusing to hear how the ‘God’ of motoring sometimes has a bout of the flu, but how huge conglomerates could be brought down to their knees by a few journalists.
1997, and the journalist Robert Collin from the motor magazine Teknikens Värld overturned the new Mercedes-Benz A-Class in the moose test, shaming the German marque and catapulting more than anything else the power of journalism. (Von Burkhard 1998)
If the A-class was not subject to a very public display of its faltering, it might have just slipped under the radar. But thanks to the hordes of journalists who extended Mercedes Benz the courtesy of some wretched publicity, the A-class was immediately fitted with an ESP system (Electronic Stability Programme).
The now-famous moose test forced Mercedes to halt production and recall about 3000 cars just one week after the model went on sale in Europe. It cost the company an estimated $250 million in extra development.
Fig i. Moose Test (Mercury 2008)
Now the S-class was a different matter altogether. An impossible to crash Mercedes Benz S-Class became the modern reincarnation of the Titanic. It crashed. And what was worse, there were journalists specially invited to witness the S-Class’ new technology. In addition to witnessing Mercedes’ shameful outcome of a test, they reported it, with retro clues of the previous disaster. According to Mercedes Benz, it was simply a case of an engineer forgetting to activate the system, but this was the same company that denied the A-class had any stability issues.
Later there were claims about the steel in the structure confusing the radar guided system, but Stern TV, who filmed the programme was quick to compare the S-class failure to the nasty falling-over tendency the early A-class Mercedes had. Auto journalism at its finest! Now Stern TV was a mainstream channel, and that probably made it worse – Mercedes was subject to a very public defacing.
Spoiling the TT
The Audi TT was another stellar example of journalism’s power to modify a product. The original TT, applauded for its styling, was also in the news for another reason. The TT was reported to lose all composure at high speeds and over-react to steering inputs.
The TT models gained press coverage for a series of high-speed accidents in Europe. Reported crashes and related fatalities occurred at speeds in excess of 110 mph (180 km/h) during abrupt lane changes or sharp turns.
Fig ii. Audi TT (rear) (Salmon 2003)
Both the coupe and roadster models were recalled in late 1999/early 2000 to improve predictability of the car’s handling at very high-speeds. Audi’s Electronic Stability Programme and rear spoiler were added, along with suspension modifications. This was journalism powering a decision.
Now it’s questionable if softening the suspension really did anything to improve high-speed handling and even if it did, whether it came at the expense of jeopardizing the sporty ride it delivered in the older model, but Audi was very certain that they released graphic images, that highlighted among other improvements, a new ESP / ABS set-up, new sports suspension, and the new spoiler.
Fig iii. Audi TT (front) (Salmon 2003)
But it proves how automotive journalism comes round full circle. Car launched, problems identified, new version released with old problems ironed out.
Another thing that helps the automobile industry is its capacity to come back for another round. A manufacturer introduces a model, the journalist (or a thousand journalists) comments on it, the company comes back again with a stronger punch with its next model. The now nearly defunct Chrysler Corporation’s 300M had a traditional nomenclature, and was a decent-enough car.
This is what Edmunds.com had to say; “A big, roomy American luxury sedan that can make time on a twisty road.” (Edmunds 2004)
Then they launched the 300C. A visual stunner, this Chrysler offering cut an unmistakable Americana bad-to-the-bone image. The 300C was spectacular. The big suits at DaimlerChrysler were listening to the pulse of the people.
“The 300C is enormously likeable, with character oozing from every pore” (Yahoo n. d.)
“Then again, just look at it. It is a masterpiece from front to back — I love its high waist and short glasshouse. Unmistakably, unapologetically American, it oozes cool and confidence.” (Sunday Times 2004)
The dramatic image needed no flashlight imagery or flowery language to back it up, but designer Ralph Gilles couldn’t help highlighting the 300C’s appeal. “People in America want things to be good again. This car is extremely timely. It’s a can-do American car.” (Gilles 2005)
The ‘Maser’ issue
Of course, pressure groups like focus groups, or owners groups, can sometimes spoil a perfectly good thing. The 2002 Giorgetto Guigiaro Maserati Coupe was one of the most evocatively designed cars the world had seen, and the teardrop lights that set off a magnificent behind that only the passionate Italians could muster the soul to define.
And the journalists took note.
“One look at the rear of the car with its unique, boomerang shaped lights and powerful haunches hinted that this was no half hearted attempt to recapture sales.” (Dawe 1999)
The next generation Maserati saw the very brilliantly executed tail lights morph into a very dull, almost Japanese-esque execution. It was the work of an American focus group, which obviously came up with an absolutely anti-artistic solution to a design exercise of genius; that sometimes happens.
But it’s mostly like the Koenigsegg’s rear spoiler. The car was quite twitchy when ‘The Stig’ drove it. When it spun out at the hands of ‘The Stig’ on the Top Gear test track, the car was perceived to have a real problem, even though the Koenigsegg was claimed by Jeremy Clarkson himself to be the cure for smoking.
Then Koenigsegg’s engineers fixed a spoiler to the rear, and Top Gear shouted that it was automobile journalism’s first triumph at making a manufacturer ‘do’ something, even calling the spoiler ‘Top Gear wing’
Fig iv. Koenigsegg without the ‘Top Gear’ wing (Flickr 2008)
Fig v. Koenigsegg with the ‘Top Gear’ wing (Flickr 2007)
‘
Ford’ing a troubled river
General Motor’s was not the only American manufacturer to have run-ins with the media on a large scale. The Ford Explorer, which would have been fabled to become one of Ford’s biggest commercial successes, went down in history for very different reasons.
The Explorer started life destined to become an American legend, giving America the SUV, and cementing Ford’s position as one of the top automobile manufacturers. The SUV segment, pioneered by the Ford Explorer, became the largest growing segment in modern motoring times.
What Ford did not foresee was over hundreds of deaths, thousands of injuries and billions of dollars of settlements in lawsuits. Of course, there was automotive journalism playing an undeniable role here. Here, in this case not in its most famous guise of a car test, but in a substantially more important role of news source to the masses. American newspapers were filled with the latest lawsuits, pending and settled, of stability tests of the Explorer, and of-course of the fallout between Firestone and Ford. (Lampe 2001 cited in NY Times 2001)
Conclusion
This paper has addressed various capacities in which today’s automotive journalists conduct their businesses. From the paper it is clear that a while the stereotypical journalist tests cars, his real world counterparts do much more. They can test cars, report recalls, validate manufacturer claims, organize support groups of consumers, and even engage in constructive discourse with manufacturers about product development.
It is hoped that the auto journalist is seen as more than a manufacturer’s sidekick in today’s world; and the examples and illustrations used in the paper should prove the point.
List of References
BBC (2009) London News [TV] 13 May 2009: 20:57
Dawe, J. (1999) Maserati 3200 GT Coupe [online] available from
http://www.jasondawe.com/Maserati.htm
Edmunds, B. (2004) 2004 Chrysler 300M Overview [online] available from
http://www.edmunds.com/chrysler/300m/2004/review.html
Frankel, A. (2004) Chrysler 300C A triumph against the odds [online] available from
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/new_car_reviews/article847819.ece
Gilles, R. (2005)
Cited in Lienert, A and Lienert, P. 2005 Chrysler 300 [online] available from
http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/carandriving/reviewnew/chrysler_300c-1004244.html
Kahn, D (2004) Back in the Saddle Again [online] available from
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=103665
[23 Nov 2004]
Koenigsegg (Without wing) (2008) CCX [online] available from
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smileymanwithahat/3015034166/
Koenigsegg (With wing) (2007) The Great Car show [online] available from
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cheekyspanky/421595467/
Lampe, J. (2001)
Cited in NY Times Business Text of Letter to Ford From Bridgestone
Moose Test (2008) The Elk Test [online] available fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moose_test
Nader, R. (1965). Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile. New York: Grossman
TT (Rear) (2003) The new and improved Audi TT [online] available from
http://www.salmondrive.de/tt/1.html
TT (Front) (2003) The new and improved Audi TT [online] available from
http://www.salmondrive.de/tt3.html
Von Burkhard, S (1998) ‘Der Elchtester’ DIE ZEIT 27 Feb 1998
Yahoo (n. d.) Chrysler 300C : HEMI DETACHED? [online] available from
http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/car-reviews/car-and-driving/chrysler-300c-1004244.html