So BMW flies Edmunds out to the Netherlands, puts them up in nice hotel, gives them the keys to several R56 prototypes and some track time, and they can’t even write a full page about it. This is why automotive journalism is generally so depressing to me.
There’s really no point but, here’s the link if you’ve got 30 seconds to kill:
[ A Sneak Peak at the New Mini Cooper S ] Edmunds / Inside the Line
Seriously, I can even write better and longer than that. It seems like they copy and paste most of the article from some other previews! LOL!
haha, the person who worte this is clearly not very familiar with the current model … this was as enthusiastic as Katie Holmes about Tom Cruise
I’ll save some of you the click. Here’s a summary:
– 90% of the “report” is basically a rehashing of the press release text and photos.
– last 10% – oh, by the way, we drove it.
A big thanks for that!
Good grief, talk about an opportunity squandered. I can’t even remember the last time a car manufacturer did a press day with 20 or so camo’d prototypes.
I don’t know where Edmunds got so popular. Their trade-in values have always been way optimistic for me. True to form, their trade value for my 03′ MINI is a solid $2,000.00 higher than ANY of the other web-based estimators … like Kelly Blue Book (who happens to be right in line with what dealers in my area are offering). I don’t really think they know what they are doing … they certainly can’t write an original, thoughtful report. I turned in more informative and entertaining book reports in the 7th grade.
“IL drove the Mini Cooper S with the turbocharged version of the new engine, which delivers 175 hp.”
yeah… ANNNND?
To take the opposite view for a moment, do we want automotive journalists — or any journalists — gushing about products simply because the manufacturer flew them to an all-expenses-paid holiday in the Netherlands? Do we want journalists accepting free trips?
Maybe Edmunds deserves some respect here. To MINI enthusiasts, offering a new color knob is worth at least 50 blog comments. But maybe Edmunds has the more reasonable perspective for the general automotive press readership.
By the way, did any of the press articles note that MINI paid their trip expenses? Whether or not the writer accepts a free trip — I don’t think true journalists should — at least shouldn’t that fact be reported in any articles?
>Maybe Edmunds deserves some respect here. To MINI enthusiasts, offering a new color knob is worth at least 50 blog comments. But maybe Edmunds has the more reasonable perspective for the general automotive press readership.
I would have given them some respect if they had said – anything – about the car. If they had an opinion or even original thought it might have been something worth reading.
>By the way, did any of the press articles note that MINI paid their trip expenses? Whether or not the writer accepts a free trip — I don’t think true journalists should — at least shouldn’t that fact be reported in any articles?
Yes – common practice in the industry. As a journalist, if you can’t accept a free trip and still remain impartial, you need to find another job. I’d say a few should think about it.
<blockquote>As a journalist, if you can’t accept a free trip and still remain impartial, you need to find another job.</blockquote>
Yes, but I think you’re missing the point I’m trying to make, Gabe. Let me try to elaborate.
Accepting free trips at least creates the appearance (and probably more) that the journalist cannot be impartial. That’s because the gravy train will likely dry up if the author writes a bad review. Will MINI invite Edmunds to a similar event in the future, for example?
We don’t allow judges in a courtroom to accept free drinks from the prosecutor. Even the appearance undermines the judge’s reputation for impartiality.
There are many, many examples in which reputable journalists do not accept free trips. Newspaper reporters from the Washington Post and New York Times do not accept free trips to accompany political candidates running for office — their companies pay all expenses for campaign tours. (There are still problems of access to sources — sources work very hard to manipulate reporters by granting or denying access to information — but the better newspapers try very hard to work against those practices.) Consumer Reports accepts no free trips from manufacturers, and they don’t even accept free products to test. Consequently they have an unparalleled reputation. (I’ve observed people criticize CR alleging lack of skill at times, but they do not criticize CR for fealty to manufacturers.)
I realize Edmunds probably doesn’t have CR’s budget (though I wonder…), but there’s an easy, partial solution for this conflict of interest: let me, the reader, know what MINI gave you when you write your review. That way I’ll know I should exercise extra skepticism when reading your report. Here’s an example of what that disclosure might look like:
<i>MINI paid our business class airfare, four star hotel, and high priced meals for this trip. Although MINI offered special edition iPods as gifts, we passed on those.</i>
Actually, that last sentence is an example that automotive “journalists” could easily enhance their reputations by gently insinuating that their competitors may not have as much integrity.
Finally, Gabe, I’d like to give you credit for following this type of practice, at least on an ad hoc basis, from what I’ve observed. I would encourage you to make it a standard rule if MINI or anybody else ever puts you in a position where you’re getting freebies or special considerations. Just let your readers know, that’s all. I know in your case it’ll enhance your credibility because of the way you do things.
Good elaboration Timothy. I suppose I’m a bit jaded from the experiences I’ve had with other (old school) journalists. There’s such a pat on the back mentality to this industry that it makes me sick. You’re right in your concerns over free trips. The better writers out there can get beyond that but (from what I’ve seen) still have trouble really writing a truly honest review from time to time. This is what makes Top Gear (and Fifth Gear) such great TV.
When MINI invites me across the ocean to test a car (still waiting) you can bet I’ll report on every facet of the trip and give you a clear picture of the experience.
<blockquote>There’s such a pat on the back mentality to this industry that it makes me sick. You’re right in your concerns over free trips. The better writers out there can get beyond that but (from what I’ve seen) still have trouble really writing a truly honest review from time to time.</blockquote>
The automobile industry is not the only one with incestuous relationships between manufacturers and “journalists.” There are analogous problems in most trade-oriented reporting. Certainly the technology industry suffers from this problem.
<blockquote>When MINI invites me across the ocean to test a car (still waiting) you can bet I’ll report on every facet of the trip and give you a clear picture of the experience.</blockquote>
No, no, I’m not expecting that any reporter describe his/her off hours if that’s what you mean by “every facet,” except in the narrow sense (e.g. “MINI paid for my wife and me to attend…”) Whether you had a decaf or regular latte isn’t relevant detail, for example. Well, OK, it could be if you say something like, “The MINI quickened my pulse with every turn.” 🙂
But journalists should tell readers about any appearance of or actual bias, and that would certainly include anything of value that a manufacturer offers to the journalist.
For comparison, the financial press has gotten better in recent years. If you read <a HREF="http://www.fool.com" rel="nofollow">Motley Fool</a> or watch CNBC, you’ll read or hear the analysts talk about their holdings and financial interests with respect to the stocks they discuss. I would prefer even more transparency, such as a Web page where I can see all of that analyst’s current financial interests. The analyst could hold a major position in a competitor, for example, and that’s worth knowing. Still, it’s some progress from the “pump and dump” days.
In the political arena this is a big problem. “Pundits,” Republican and Democratic alike, fail to disclose that they are consulting for, advising, and/or hold the advertising contract with particular political candidates. Shame on the media for not insisting on these disclosures when they interview so-called pundits.
The Web is a great tool for disclosure, because it’s easy to have a prominent link to a detailed “About My Financial and Other Interests” page along with brief disclosures accompanying each story. I am encouraged by the new medium and the potential for greater transparency, and MotoringFile is an example.