Is modern journalism ruining cars?
Discussion
Just musing...
It seems today that modern journalism is as much about entertainment and the personality as it is the content.
If a BMW does big drifts for the YouTube cameras and the equivalent Audi doesn’t it’s a bad car.
And I often read / hear stuff like "of course you really need the 19" wheels to fill out those arches / the sports suspension really improves road holding"
The truth is though how the gearbox shifts or how efficient the TDI diesel engine is or how quiet the car is really are much more important to 95% of car buyers.
Would it be so wrong to to hear "well the engine is a bit lazy and in the twisties it's a bit of a pudding - but for cruising up and down the M4 it really is the most comfy / quietest / economical / reliable car in it's class".
You just can't build a car like that any more - if it doesn't 'handle' or 'do the numbers' it gets slated in the group tests and sales are no doubt impacted. So manufacturers don't take the risk.
It seems today that modern journalism is as much about entertainment and the personality as it is the content.
If a BMW does big drifts for the YouTube cameras and the equivalent Audi doesn’t it’s a bad car.
And I often read / hear stuff like "of course you really need the 19" wheels to fill out those arches / the sports suspension really improves road holding"
The truth is though how the gearbox shifts or how efficient the TDI diesel engine is or how quiet the car is really are much more important to 95% of car buyers.
Would it be so wrong to to hear "well the engine is a bit lazy and in the twisties it's a bit of a pudding - but for cruising up and down the M4 it really is the most comfy / quietest / economical / reliable car in it's class".
You just can't build a car like that any more - if it doesn't 'handle' or 'do the numbers' it gets slated in the group tests and sales are no doubt impacted. So manufacturers don't take the risk.
Edited by Matt UK on Friday 23 January 22:41
I'd say both automotive design and such journalism is only a symptom of what those wanting to spend £xxxxx on a new car want these days (particularly given the longevity of modern vehicles and thus the choices available on the s/h market... If one is sensible enough to simply want an economical, comfortable, competent buy there's plenty of tidy Rover 75s out there for a few hundred quid!
(I mean the above completely objectively - like most people I fall somewhere in between the categories above, the point being that if you're going to spend serious money on a new car and are not a fleet manager it's more influenced by the heart than the head!)
(I mean the above completely objectively - like most people I fall somewhere in between the categories above, the point being that if you're going to spend serious money on a new car and are not a fleet manager it's more influenced by the heart than the head!)
Edited by Ultuous on Friday 23 January 22:57
Edited by Ultuous on Friday 23 January 22:57
Yes, all the nonsense about Nurburgring times and burnouts has precious little to do with life in the real world. Similarly big wheels and sports suspension typically add up to an unacceptable ride quality on UK roads.
Drive the cars yourself - then make up your own mind. IMO that's what works best.
Drive the cars yourself - then make up your own mind. IMO that's what works best.
People are intrinsically sheep.
Example.
Famous TV motoring personality says Corvette ZR1 and Z06 do not go around corners.
Every petrolhead on PH believes it blindly. They have never driven one. But by God they they believe that they are right.
Please see entries No 12 and 14. The Nurburgring is renowned for being perfectly straight....right.
https://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-times-top-100/
For some reason perfectly rationale people just lose all sense of the ability to do their own research and question because some bloke on the telly/ internet says so.
And of course....
Davina McCall dyes her own hair nightly with a £4.99 product because "you are worth it...or nourished... or whatever..."
Every celebrity is an expert perfumier and come up with their own fragrance.
Beanz Meanz ......
Example.
Famous TV motoring personality says Corvette ZR1 and Z06 do not go around corners.
Every petrolhead on PH believes it blindly. They have never driven one. But by God they they believe that they are right.
Please see entries No 12 and 14. The Nurburgring is renowned for being perfectly straight....right.
https://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-times-top-100/
For some reason perfectly rationale people just lose all sense of the ability to do their own research and question because some bloke on the telly/ internet says so.
And of course....
Davina McCall dyes her own hair nightly with a £4.99 product because "you are worth it...or nourished... or whatever..."
Every celebrity is an expert perfumier and come up with their own fragrance.
Beanz Meanz ......
Edited by Troubleatmill on Friday 23 January 23:04
It is mostly legislation that is ruining cars. Bonnets have to be high, meaning that wheels have to proportionally huge so as not to look stupid. Similarly, A pillars have to be thick and short to be strong enough not to crumple if the car rolls onto its roof. Which is fine and sensible, except that having wide A pillars means more accidents are caused in the first place.
Zad said:
It is mostly legislation that is ruining cars.
I do find it amusing when safety/otherwise-legislated features on a car aren't really compatible with general car usage. For example, the explosive bonnet mounts on GTRs and 370Zs that fire off if you catch the bumper on a kerb (I seem to recall this had a pretty large forum thread a few years back on a GTR), or the yaw sensors in an E46 M3 convertible that fire the roll hoops -through- the rear windscreen if you park up on a slightly steep incline.Troubleatmill said:
Beanz Meanz ......
... Loose movements and other unpleasantness sometime later. Which sums up what modern journalism has done to itself (period) in the past half-decade Edited by Troubleatmill on Friday 23 January 23:04
. It's unmitigated bo
cks nowadays - and has been for some time (and not just the motoring press - this is a rant for NP&E, admittedly 
).With reference to the motoring press, remember the 'scare' in the classic car press around "modified cars won't be able to get MoTs in 6 weeks' time" back in September 2011?? That was just the beginning - they've voided themselves (in polite terms) - and it's not just the classic car press who are scraping at the bottom every week or month either
.Oh, go on then, have a
! And a 
or two 
.Cars are - within their context, whether modern or classics - arguably reasonable-at-the-very-least nowadays; the current "journalism" describing them is arguably f
d.Last time I was at my Dad's he had an old copy of (I think) Classic & Sports Car magazine next to the bog. I have to say as somebody who hadn't read any classic styled reviews of cars from the 60s before, it contrasted sharply with modern reviews and it was hugely refreshing to read about how well-considered the gear ratios were and how much wind noise there was etc etc
Most write-ups can only depend on how honest the writer is, did he/she really post the publicised lap time? Etcetera.
Awful lot of bull wtitten sometimes by not such highly skilled drivers(poetic license?) Unskilled drivers virtually wrecked the sales of MGCs simply because of thier fear/inability to drive the car properly.Thats only one example-must be more, but its too early for me to think of more.
Awful lot of bull wtitten sometimes by not such highly skilled drivers(poetic license?) Unskilled drivers virtually wrecked the sales of MGCs simply because of thier fear/inability to drive the car properly.Thats only one example-must be more, but its too early for me to think of more.
I miss the golden era of "Car" magazine, which gave us such wonderful and insightful motoring journalism from writers of the calibre of Phil Llewellin, Leonard Setright and Russell Bulgin. They wrote about the experience of driving - the journey was more important than the vehicle.
Nowadays writing styles tend to be generic, and it's hard to guess the writer from a sample of the prose in most cases. The writers tend to think that the reader is actually interested in them as a personality (I'm not) and the details of their lives. They think that descriptions of taking the car to its limits, with accompanying photos showing the car sideways at a hairpin bend (many magazines fail to resist the temptation and these shots are often garnished with photoshopped tyre smoke, especially if the car has performance pretensions) along with descriptions which would have the reader enthralled by the scribbler's driving prowess constitute a good article.
As with the cars themselves, we can all choose what we want to read. Trouble is, there are few motoring journalists who produce stories that I want to read.
Nowadays writing styles tend to be generic, and it's hard to guess the writer from a sample of the prose in most cases. The writers tend to think that the reader is actually interested in them as a personality (I'm not) and the details of their lives. They think that descriptions of taking the car to its limits, with accompanying photos showing the car sideways at a hairpin bend (many magazines fail to resist the temptation and these shots are often garnished with photoshopped tyre smoke, especially if the car has performance pretensions) along with descriptions which would have the reader enthralled by the scribbler's driving prowess constitute a good article.
As with the cars themselves, we can all choose what we want to read. Trouble is, there are few motoring journalists who produce stories that I want to read.
Dermot O'Logical said:
I miss the golden era of "Car" magazine, which gave us such wonderful and insightful motoring journalism from writers of the calibre of Phil Llewellin, Leonard Setright and Russell Bulgin. They wrote about the experience of driving - the journey was more important than the vehicle.
Nowadays writing styles tend to be generic, and it's hard to guess the writer from a sample of the prose in most cases. The writers tend to think that the reader is actually interested in them as a personality (I'm not) and the details of their lives. They think that descriptions of taking the car to its limits, with accompanying photos showing the car sideways at a hairpin bend (many magazines fail to resist the temptation and these shots are often garnished with photoshopped tyre smoke, especially if the car has performance pretensions) along with descriptions which would have the reader enthralled by the scribbler's driving prowess constitute a good article.
As with the cars themselves, we can all choose what we want to read. Trouble is, there are few motoring journalists who produce stories that I want to read.
So true. It's been almost two years since I stopped subscribing to Car/Evo/TG/AE/Autocar/Etc. I still buy the odd copy. Mags now push the cult of bland journalists not dissimilar to the Daily Mail. Years ago to find out who had written a piece you used to have their initials at the end of the article. Now it's "JOE BLAND DRIVES THE PORSCHE 999!!!"Nowadays writing styles tend to be generic, and it's hard to guess the writer from a sample of the prose in most cases. The writers tend to think that the reader is actually interested in them as a personality (I'm not) and the details of their lives. They think that descriptions of taking the car to its limits, with accompanying photos showing the car sideways at a hairpin bend (many magazines fail to resist the temptation and these shots are often garnished with photoshopped tyre smoke, especially if the car has performance pretensions) along with descriptions which would have the reader enthralled by the scribbler's driving prowess constitute a good article.
As with the cars themselves, we can all choose what we want to read. Trouble is, there are few motoring journalists who produce stories that I want to read.
I've crowed on about it for years now - journalists write more about themselves than about the cars they should be writing about.
Cars are a means of transport. It's their primary function. This used to be reflected in the journalism associated with. Gradually it became important not what the car was, but what it said about the owner. Journalism took this on board and added comments about quality feel etc.Today a car is disposable. You swap them like your mobile phone, on a contract. Sadly current journalism panders to this and pours out meaningless facts and figures along with photoshopped pictures. Their just advertising brochures.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff