• fb_100000195672415 avatar Mark Posted: 2/27/2013 6:58pm PST

    Richard Read concludes "Whether or not Broder's assessment of the Model S was 100% accurate..." Thus, he believes Broder's assessment may be 100% accurate. 100%! Despite: (1) Tesla logs showing Broder drove in circles supposedly looking for the SuperCharger in the dark when YouTube videos show that both north- and southbound chargers would be IMPOSSIBLE to miss, (2) Broder's assertion (and nothing else) that Tesla engineers told him that he could drive the remaining 62 miles of the trip when the car said he only had 31 miles of range, and (3) the Time's article leading with a photo of the Model S on a flatbed truck when the expressed intent of the article was to evaluate the SuperChargers. Whatever happened to journalistic integrity?

  • fb_100004319771268 avatar Alex Posted: 2/26/2013 4:48pm PST

    6 People made the same trip. https://twitter.com/TeslaRoadTrip

  • fb_545537738 avatar Ramon Posted: 2/26/2013 12:30pm PST

    Well, anyone that knows automobiles knows that it takes some knowledge and discipline to drive an automobile so as to get the maximum mileage. I know how to drive a Prius to obtain 10 MPG and how to drive it to obtain 50 MPG. If this reporter was in category of not knowing or not caring to know, of course the results would be less than optimal. The evidence points that others drove the same model car in similar circumstances and did get expected results. Mr. Broder could have attempted a second run for verification.

  • jake.a avatar jake.a Posted: 2/26/2013 12:09pm PST

    This is a quite subjectively written(if not overly biased) piece. It's a blog, not a news article since it's so blatant which side you back on. I don't have a dog in the fight between Elon Musk(and green tech) and NYT(the rest), but c'mon Richard Read! If you're trying to be a reporter, at least do make some effort to fake in some objectivity dust instead of bashing one side to the bitter end and ending up sounding like an oil industry propaganda. I would be turned off as just much if I read some Elon Musk gospel article, but this is no better. Why must everything need to be so polarizing these days anyway? If I read this without knowing anything, I'd have to thought that it's all Elon Musk going batshit crazy while Broder has done no wrong

  • montf1 avatar montf1 Posted: 2/26/2013 11:07am PST

    Nice article. I am not sure how commentator Chris O concludes that it is "well established" that Broder fudged the story.

    I find it amusing that so many average people are taking the side of a billionaire who is taking money out of their pockets via massive government subsidies. Why is the common man subsidizing a billionaire when we are talking of sequestration, cutting aid to the needy, etc.? Do people who buy $100k Tesla’s need subsidies – surely we can allocate that money to better purposes in our current economic scenario. Musk paints a virtuous self-image but he has made over 200 visits to DC and has met over 50% of our congressmen!

  • dgatewood avatar dgatewood Posted: 2/26/2013 1:52pm PST

    Well Bill it seems anyone with a modicum of common sense would support Tesla if we are financing it instead of wishing it to fail. As to why the common man is financing it just look around at the other things we back like big subsidies for the oil industry...I could go on and on.

  • Chris O avatar Chris O Posted: 2/26/2013 9:55am PST

    Wow, I guess birds of a feather really do stick together.

    Despite some exaggeration from Musk's side it has been well established that Broder fudged the story, setting the car up to fail to prove his point that EVs don't work and get the photo opportunity he needed of the car on a flatbed.

    Articles like this prove though that criticizing reporters really isn't helpful. Even if you are right you really can't win.