QOTD: Influenced by the Automotive Press?

by Tim Healey

Published: June 20th, 2023

After last week's story on how Consumer Reports slapped the "avoid" label on the popular Ford F-150, I was going to ask you how much CR shapes your purchase decisions. The magazine is popular, and I know a lot of people, both car enthusiasts and not, who trust it.

Yet sometimes CR says not to buy a car and it sells well. Or vice versa.

After some reflection, I figured opening this QOTD to the larger automotive press would generate a more robust discussion.

Of course, the automotive press has changed. Your local newspaper likely no longer has its own automotive critic -- and if it's publishing reviews at all, they're probably syndicated. That might affect how you, the consumer, do your research.

I'd hope you trust us -- you may not agree with us, or like my style or the style of others who write reviews here, but you should know we're honest. But I am not naive -- I suspect that when it comes time to shop for your next new car, we're just one stop on the dial, so to speak.

I'd bet my meager savings that you're looking at us, Jalopnik, the buff books, the car-shopping giants like Cars.com, and so forth and so on. And, of course, Consumer Reports.

So let's make this a multi-part QOTD. Does the automotive press factor into your car-buying decisions? If so, how, and how much? Which sites are you reading when shopping, and which are you reading just because you're daydreaming about a certain car? Which do you read just for fun? Do Consumer Reports recommendations matter to you? What about Cars.com, KBB, AutoTrader, Consumer Guide, et al? Are you reading the buff books for car-shopping advice, or more so because you want to see who wins the most recent comparison test?

Sound off below.

[Image: Ralf Liebhold/Shutterstock.com]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#QOTD #ConsumerReports #AutomotiveMedia #Journalism #AutomotivePress #QuestionOfTheDay #Journalismism

Tim Healey

Tim Healey grew up around the auto-parts business and has always had a love for cars — his parents joke his first word was “‘Vette”. Despite this, he wanted to pursue a career in sports writing but he ended up falling semi-accidentally into the automotive-journalism industry, first at Consumer Guide Automotive and later at Web2Carz.com. He also worked as an industry analyst at Mintel Group and freelanced for About.com, CarFax, Vehix.com, High Gear Media, Torque News, FutureCar.com, Cars.com, among others, and of course Vertical Scope sites such as AutoGuide.com, Off-Road.com, and HybridCars.com. He’s an urbanite and as such, doesn’t need a daily driver, but if he had one, it would be compact, sporty, and have a manual transmission.

More by Tim Healey

Comments

Join the conversation

4 of 58 comments

MaintenanceCosts on Jun 21, 2023

It's possible to learn things about cars by reading the automotive media, but you have to read way under the surface. On the surface, everything about every car is great, because automotive media may be the purest example of access journalism there is. But the reviewers who really care about their audiences will put in subtle tells. For instance, if you read "the car rode beautifully, with just a hint of undamped movement from the 20" wheels," you iknow that the car with the big wheels clomps harshly over the smallest bump and you should avoid it.

But even with careful reading they are no substitute at all for a short test drive. I make my decisions mostly through driving experiences.

1 Reply
Arthur Dailey on Jun 21, 2023

I used to religiously purchase Lemon-Aid and Consumers Reports prior to acquiring a vehicle. And we purchased a vehicle based on the recommendation of a Toronto based automotive writer who publicly wrote about purchasing that make/model for his family. We were very pleased with it.

Otherwise I believe that 'automotive journalism' is largely an oxymoron and they primarily shill for the manufacturers. Nearly every model is 'improved' over the previous one. Cars that were not competitive are suddenly 'competitive'. And they almost always test and recommend the 'fully dressed' version rather than the base version.

That is one reason why I originally started reading/viewing TTAC. To get a different perspective.

1 Reply
- See 1 previous
- Lou_BC on Jun 21, 2023
  
  There's a reason why they tend to be called "presstitutes".
  
  Like
- Sgeffe on Jun 22, 2023
  
  Correct--both of you!
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?