Didn't Hammond recently crash an electric supercar or something? They must sure hate EVs
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52476019]Didn't Hammond recently crash an electric supercar or something? They must sure hate EVs[/QUOTE]
Turns out a lot of stuff can change in 9 years!
JC who was also a writer hates EV's, he still won't eat crow and admit they're the future. He even made a few subtle stabs at Tesla on The Grand Tour.
I remember the episode being bad, but I don't remember it being that bad.
"The car ran out of battery after only 55 miles".
Sucks that they were able to get away with it since there were pretty much no electric cars with that kind of range in existence to challenge that bullshit script at the time.
[media]https://youtu.be/3mfFpujhfBE[/media]
Tesla sued over this and lost. They claimed malicious intent but Top Gear claimed their show was intended for entertainment, not serious reviews, and therefore didn't need to stick to facts when testing cars.
[QUOTE=Supacasey;52476693]Tesla sued over this and lost. They claimed malicious intent but Top Gear claimed their show was intended for entertainment, not serious reviews, and therefore didn't need to stick to facts when testing cars.[/QUOTE]
The same defense FOX News used. And won with.
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52476019]Didn't Hammond recently crash an electric supercar or something? They must sure hate EVs[/QUOTE]
Not really. Fairly sure Hammond's said nothing but good things about that car.
[QUOTE=Saxon;52476045]JC who was also a writer hates EV's, he still won't eat crow and admit they're the future. He even made a few subtle stabs at Tesla on The Grand Tour.[/QUOTE]
Clarkson is a cunt. He's funny and talented but the man can be bloody insufferable. I wouldn't have cared if his career was destroyed after punching that guy over cold food.
[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52476809]Clarkson is a cunt. He's funny and talented but the man can be bloody insufferable. I wouldn't have cared if his career was destroyed after punching that guy over cold food.[/QUOTE]
To be honest though, that is part of the reason why he's part of the trio. If the problem can't be solved with more speed and power, then it wasn't a problem.
nu-top gear showed off the model X and they couldn't stop masturbating over it.
waaaahhhh, top gear was mean to a car company
Why do people never accept that its a scripted entertainment show, not a news program.
[QUOTE=Birdman101;52476955]waaaahhhh, top gear was mean to a car company
Why do people never accept that its a scripted entertainment show, not a news program.[/QUOTE]
Because if you make a statement that a product is bad on a popular show, that can affect the sales of that product and hurt the company, even if the the statement isn't true.
Plus, its not out of the realm of possibility that a show sponsored by several car companies might have a vested interest on the poor sales of the Tesla.
[QUOTE=defy;52476988]Because if you make a statement that a product is bad on a popular show, that can affect the sales of that product and hurt the company, even if the the statement isn't true.
Plus, its not out of the realm of possibility that a show sponsored by several car companies might have a vested interest on the poor sales of the Tesla.[/QUOTE]
top gear was no different from WWE, don't kid yourself
defamation only holds real ground when it's not on a comedy show
[QUOTE=Egevened;52477133]top gear was no different from WWE, don't kid yourself
defamation only holds real ground when it's not on a comedy show[/QUOTE]
Which is exactly why stock holders were asking Musk why the Tesla car broke down on the show
[QUOTE=Birdman101;52476955]waaaahhhh, top gear was mean to a car company
Why do people never accept that its a scripted entertainment show, not a news program.[/QUOTE]
Because the lie ended up being malicious, and having an effect in the real world.
It wasn't presented as a joke, so people took it seriously
[QUOTE=Birdman101;52476955]waaaahhhh, top gear was mean to a car company
Why do people never accept that its a scripted entertainment show, not a news program.[/QUOTE]
Top Gear isn't presented in a fashion that would imply everything's scripted. There's no screen at the start telling you "This show is scripted and for entertainment purposes only - breakdowns and underperformance of cars may be simulated to suit the reviewers opinion", either. I'd say most people take what Clarkson et al. says about a car at face value, and I don't think most people would expect them to simulate breakdowns to suit a predefined opinion in a review segment. It's terrible practice.
[QUOTE=Supacasey;52476693]Tesla sued over this and lost. They claimed malicious intent but Top Gear claimed their show was intended for entertainment, not serious reviews, and therefore didn't need to stick to facts when testing cars.[/QUOTE]
What kind of bullshit court accepted this and didn't see it as defamatory or libel in any sense? That is so ridiculous!
Imagine how history is going to look at all the skewed press (breakdown over-representation) and shows covering electric vehicles by whatever companies the automotive industry has their tendrils in.
[QUOTE=Birdman101;52476955]waaaahhhh, top gear was mean to a car company
Why do people never accept that its a scripted entertainment show, not a news program.[/QUOTE]
Yes, top gear was entertainment, but i was under the impression that they don't lie about the performance of the cars they drive, and i think i'm in the vast majority here.
What's even the point of a car show if you're not actually talking about the car you're driving?
[QUOTE=Supacasey;52476693]Tesla sued over this and lost. They claimed malicious intent but Top Gear claimed their show was intended for entertainment, not serious reviews, and therefore didn't need to stick to facts when testing cars.[/QUOTE]
On one hand it makes sense - Top Gear isn't to be taken seriously, they even say so very often themselves. On the other hand the reality of it is that most people do in fact to some degree trust it as car review program, even though they should not, and that should be taken into consideration.
When I saw the show I just thought it was a run of bad luck, as up to that point I'd heard nothing but good things about Tesla's cars. I never thought that it was malicious.
Why did they pitch shift the clips of Clarkson and May talking?
[QUOTE=Chubbs;52477577]Why did they pitch shift the clips of Clarkson and May talking?[/QUOTE]
copyright.
bbc are notorious for automatically claiming any top gear clip based on the audio and visual data. so what you see on top gear clips or full episodes is either pitch shifted audio or the video being in a small box and the rest of the video being an animation, which fools the automatic claiming system.
Did Top Gear actually lie about the range of the car though? There is no way you'll get the full range on a race track. Even newer Tesla cars won't last more than 5-6 good laps on a track before operating far below peak performance (not even limp mode) which is something you don't have to worry about with a petrol car.
There are also quite few cases with the Model S going into limp mode doing a single lap at the Nuburgring too due to overheating.
Obviously Top Gear didn't give it a great review but it wasn't a completely inaccurate review either. Tesla is just trying very hard to act like they were badly wronged and Top Gear is out to get them but I don't think that's the case.
[QUOTE=BAZ;52477957]Did Top Gear actually lie about the range of the car though?[/QUOTE]
Yes, they even admitted to it, the script itself was written before even testing the car and Tesla has the in built recording technology to prove it, Top Gear turned the vehicle off themselves and then lied about it.
Then they admitted to it in court, but got off scot free because they are "Entertainment" despite the fact many people, including myself previously took there opinions on cars entirely seriously.
[QUOTE=BAZ;52477957]Obviously Top Gear didn't give it a great review but it wasn't a completely inaccurate review either. Tesla is just trying very hard to act like they were badly wronged and Top Gear is out to get them but I don't think that's the case.[/QUOTE]
They lied their teeth off and put the car in a completely bad light, ultimately costing Tesla money and investors, how far do you have to go before the review is [B]completely inaccurate[/B]? Because I'd go as far as to say this was completely inaccurate given the problem itself wasn't real and was self-inflicted for comedic effect. :s:
[QUOTE=Egevened;52477133]top gear was no different from WWE, don't kid yourself
defamation only holds real ground when it's not on a comedy show[/QUOTE]
it was only after this debacle that i and probably most others had any clue there was any bias.
i mean, i dont get to test supercars every other day.
[QUOTE=Supacasey;52476693]Tesla sued over this and lost. They claimed malicious intent but Top Gear claimed their show was intended for entertainment, not serious reviews, and therefore didn't need to stick to facts when testing cars.[/QUOTE]
This baffles me, because the amount of evidence to prove they're losing investors and money because of this has go to be huge.
And even if Tesla can take the hit, why let the reputation of the industry you're trying to form be tarnished (on repeat)?
Why isn't Elon Musk doing more about this?
[editline]17th July 2017[/editline]
The only reason Top Gear did what they did was because they knew it would have an impact on the public opinion of electric cars. Not only is it common knowledge that car-twats will take TG as the word of god, but why the hell else wouldn't the segment be funny?
How many scripted scenes are there of cars breaking down and the guys taking the piss out of the situation? Why wasn't there one here? Why do all the shots happen after the car is already out of juice?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
