automotive editorial standards

[Michael McLaughlin]

As someone in the newspaper business, I feel the need to point out that 
most automotive content in newspapers is produced by the 
advertising/promotional people, which should explain the (typically 
gushing) focus of the content. Very few newspapers have actual 
journalism folks covering the automotive world; Royal Ford's position 
is a rarity.

Yes, he did screw up. And yes, it's something that he certainly 
shouldn't have screwed up. But please be understanding and at least a 
little forgiving -- at most people's jobs, when there is an error, it's 
not seen by thousands or millions of people, nor do people call or 
e-mail to point it out.

-Mike

> Oh well.  At least they didn't attribute the TT's 1.8t to...someone
> else.  Royal Ford of the Boston Globe installed the 1.8t into the Z3
> in one of his columns, gushing about how BMW "brought it to the
> states".
>
>    Answered my email saying, and I quote, complete with missing
> capitalization and bad grammar: "total brain fart on my part is all i
> can plead. was juggling notes,installed an audi engine in a z. that's
> the problem when the results of your daily labor are seen every
> sunday by 2 million people."
>
> Cocky #$@!....ever heard of proofreading your work before you send it
> to 2 million people?  Or knowing enough about the automotive industry
> to know that BMW hasn't turbocharged a production engine in what, a
> zillion years, and in fact considers turbos 'cheating'?


> Brett, it seems that sometimes covering automobiles (and the field of
> transportation in general) is either a punishment for reporters or
> something they throw at the newbie intern fresh out of journalism 
> school
> trust fund baby boy (girl).