I’m kind of fascinated by this Tesla versus the New York Times thing. Summary: Times reporter John M. Broder took one for a test drive and says the battery ran down much more quickly than it should have, resulting in his having to be towed. Tesla CEO Elon Musk (link fixed) claims Broder lied about the whole thing (how far he drove, how long he charged the battery) and produces computer logs that he claims show Broder is lying.
Musk also points to negative articles Broder has written in the past about electric cars. I didn’t find Musk very convincing here, Broder was not that negative about electric cars, but…why did the Times have an environment reporter test drive the car rather than an automotive reporter?
Electric cars have become amazingly politicized. Conservatives from Glenn Beck to Charles Lane (who has written something like 15 anti-electric car screeds over the past couple years) hate them with a passion…I think because electric cars are an evil green idea dreamt up by soshulist eco-fascists. Broder, as an environmental reporter, is involved with the politics of this in a way an automotive reporter would not be.
As much as I generally side with reporters who are being bullied by companies, I’d have to dig a bit more deeply into the logs versus Broder’s claims and into what Broder’s political inclinations are before deciding what I think of this.
Have you all been following it at all?