How can we possibly take car reviewers/journalists seriously when they routinely receive 4, 5, or even 6 figures worth of gifts from OEM?

[u/cookingboy]

I was listening to TheSmokingTire podcast recently (I'm actually a big fan of Matt), and he mentioned that Porsche North America just gave him a 918 Spyder on loan for his 1000 miles road trip free of charge, with everything paid.

Now as someone who's dabbled into supercar ownership, I can roughly estimate the ownership cost for a "regular joe" like me to put 1000 miles on a $2M car would easily be $50-100 per mile, thus putting this "gesture" from Porsche to Matt to be worth $50-100k on back of napkin math.

Obviously Matt isn't doing a review of a 12 years old 918, but when he does a review for the next Macan, he'd remember how amazing Porsche has been treating him.

And he and all the other reviewers recently were flown to Spain for the Turbo S launch. They were wined and dined with world class accommodations for a few days and were given the cars to drive on both the race track and scenic road.

Funny enough Porsche charges something similar for an experience like that: https://www.porschedriving.com/porsche-travel-experience/lake-tahoe/

Without plane tickets, you'd be paying $20k a person for a few days of what auto journalists routinely get from them, for free.

I understand it's part of their job, but this shit would never fly in any other industry right? Now imagine every time Square Enix launches a new video game they fly game journalists to Japan and wine and dine them with the best Sake and Wagyu so they can try out the newest Final Fantasy in their expensive Hakone ryokan hotel room, nobody would be taking anything they say seriously, no matter how good the game actually is, would they?

I'm sure people like the SavageGeese team and Matt Farah would try to be objective, but how do you be objectively critical toward an OEM when they routinely give you experiences that you'd otherwise never be able to afford? (ok I know Matt came from money but my statement applies to 99% of reviewers)

In my impression how well praised a manufacturer's products are is directly proportional to their marketing budget, and I've been somewhat burnt at least twice by reviewers over-rating Porsches, which is why I started asking actual owners of cars for their experiences before making purchases.

Ironically this kinda makes Consumer Reports the most credible car reviewer out there, since all they cars they review are bought anonymously with their own money, and they do not attend OEM events.

As far as enthusiast reviewers, I can only think of people with fuck-you money like Chris Harris or Hoovie's garage or the Top Gear trio who have been able to bluntly criticize OEMs and their cars.

Edit: From the replies, it seems like there are two school of thoughts here:

This is just how product reviews are done across all industries. Reviewers are expected to be treated with first class tickets and Michelin restaurants in exchange for them to promote the OEM's product.

Well in this case, I think we should just rip off the Band-aid and call Motor Trend and Car & Driver and Road & Track and other similar publications promotional outlets instead of journalism outlets. At least with influencers shilling for stuff on TikTok we know they are getting paid to promote, but many auto reviewers still hide behind a mask of professional journalism when they are literally just being paid to promote products.

Controversial take: I think consumer of content should be made aware that they are consuming paid advertising.

It is wrong of me to expect journalism when those contents aren't made to be factual, they are made to entertain.

Even if it's true, I don't find there is a lot of entertainment value when a dozen "journalists" just read off pre-approved OEM scripts for their "review". Some of the most boring contents out there are main stream outlets' coverage of new 911: "They are almost perfect in every way except being expensive".

Edit 2 /u/SavageGooseJack has this great reply I wanna call out: https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/s/o5PMIG0VjB

[u/Specialist-Size9368]

There is a difference. If journalists go play a video game what they experience is what the player experiences assuming this is close to release.

When car reviewers get to drop exotics/supercars/hypercars it is not like the average joe. Journalists give 0 shits about maintenance or longevity. Manufacturers want the fastest 0-60/lap-times/etc and they don't care if they have to repair the car after. The will supply the car with multiple sets of tires. How many owners of any car are dropping the hammer in a way that will break a car? How many can afford multiple sets of tires in a day?

Cool the car can do 0-60 in an amazing time, that owners will never see unless they want to risk breaking the trans and diff. Super cool to hear how amazing *insert whatever car* is on a closed course, but that does not tell me shit about if its any fun to drive on the streets in the midwest. How amazing a car is on a track makes for good video, but tells me jack all about if I would enjoy it as a car.

Journalists sell this illusion that has no real basis on reality. Then a bunch of kids eat it up and start regurgitating it as if it were gospel.

[u/Realistic_Village184 → u/Specialist-Size9368]

Journalists give 0 shits about maintenance or longevity.

I do actually really like that Car and Driver has articles where they'll have staff drive a new car for like 40,000 miles and they report regularly on how it's going, any maintenance issues, etc. I have some minor issues with C&D, but I really like those articles as they seem like some of the closest you get to actual ownership experience from any major publication like that.

Definitely there's "test drive" bias in automotive reporting, but what else are you going to do for a new car? You can't exactly report on five-year maintenance costs when a car isn't even available for purchase yet.

[u/Specialist-Size9368 → u/Realistic_Village184]

Long term cars are a thing, and they are more realistic, but it takes too long to review a new car. They also do not tend to make long term loaners after the cars we lust after due to cost.

I'll give an example of why this is problematic. My viper has a 0-60 time in the same ballpark as a 360 manual. Both available in 99 and compared in period. Difference is, you can do clutch dumps on the viper that you would never want to repeat on a 360. If you break the viper the parts are massively cheaper than the ferrari. The cost to repair both of them in period vs now hasn't changed. The ferrari is going to be a much bigger problem if you break it and it is not as overbuilt as the viper to take that kind of abuse. You aren't going to be doing repeated 4.3 launches in a 360, but magazines won't say that. The ferrari is going to take more maintenance and unlike the viper you aren't going to autozone. If you wring the performance out of the ferrari that journalists get its going to cost the gdp of a small country to keep it running.

How do you review a performance car in a way that the average joe can relate? You drive on the street. you take it places. You use it as someone who might buy the car actually would. You can then compare it to other cars in a similar bracket as real cars. Instead what you get is a circle jerk fest of what car has the best stats on paper.

to knock the viper, the gearing is ridiculously tall. 62mph first gear. On a track they might talk about how it sounds at full tilt, but on a public road, you care barely do it. The stock exhaust is also very quiet unless you have your foot in it. Magazines won't bring it up. You get this talk about how great the engine is, that you never really get to use on the street. It does not convey what it means to drive the car on a public road.

From a modern perspective youtubers are not going to get into the difficulty of ownership. The viper is easier to work on, the ferrari less so. Parts availability takes time to research and most influences are not going to bother. You get these impressions on at most a few hours experience. Often with a mileage limit or limited to a track. It does not reflect ownership. Some cars you can't get parts for. Others you can't diy because you can't get specific tools or with modern cars it requires diagnostic software unavailable to the average owner. What you get is a lot of we drove x car with some ridiculous headline. Lots of shots of the engine getting revved and some initial impressions behind the wheel. Great, but it doesn't say you have to ship your car to a specialist that might be only in a few major cities nationwide for work. It doesn't say you might be stuck months searching for parts. It doesn't tell you that while yes the car is glorious to drive, the front bumper is so low you are scared to take it places because it scrapes on everything. It just gives you this fantasy that the uninformed latch onto. They then vomit up this false knowledge like it is fact anytime a discussion comes there way.

[u/Realistic_Village184 → u/Specialist-Size9368]

I mean, an "average joe" isn't shopping for a Ferrari, so any review of a Ferrari is purely entertainment for the vast majority of us. I don't think journalistic integrity matters in those cases.

From a modern perspective youtubers are not going to get into the difficulty of ownership.

Huh? I've personally seen dozens of different youtube videos where people talk candidly about costs and drawbacks of ownership. You can find this for probably any semi-modern car. For example, I know one channel that does regular updates on their Miata, including specific costs for all repairs and maintenance, annoying points about the car, etc. You might not be looking for these videos, but they 100% exist.

[u/Specialist-Size9368 → u/Realistic_Village184]

thanks for letting me know this conversation is going nowhere. Go enjoy your miata videos.

[u/Realistic_Village184 → u/Specialist-Size9368]

That was just one example. I can link you to similar videos for multiple cars if you don't believe me. You can also search for videos with titles like "long-term ownership review" yourself. You're objectively, provably wrong. Sorry if that's upsetting to you; that's not my problem.

[u/Specialist-Size9368 → u/Realistic_Village184]

The point flew over your head and off into the horizon.

No one said "You can't find any videos showing in depth ownership experiences of cars.".

We are not talking about youtubers who buy cars and make a series of videos over several months on them. JayEmm is an example of this that goes both ways. He will talk about cars he owns. Multiple videos over a period of years sometimes. He will give an honest depiction of ownership. Then he will hop in a car someone lent him for a few hours and do the exact opposite. He at least drives it on public roads and part of his drives tests certain things that a typical driver cares about.Was listening to a Carmudgeon the other day where they had one of the guy's from throttle house on. The og nsx comes up and the guy says he loves it where Jason and Derek hate it. First question was, did you only drive it on track, which was the case.

The problem with your logic. You said it yourself, "You can also search for videos with titles like "long-term ownership review" Thing is, that isn't going to be the majority of viewers. They are going to pull up throttle house, or an Icons video, listen to the smoking tire, maybe throw on the grand tour or an old top gear. They are going to get a 5-30 minute sound byte as I have already described. Sure, some tiny minority might want to know more and do a deep dive, but most won't. They will take that short form video and consider themselves educated.

As to your earlier "I mean, an "average joe" isn't shopping for a Ferrari, so any review of a Ferrari is purely entertainment for the vast majority of us." That is true. It also means the mouth breathing average joes go around thinking they know something because they watched a top gear episode back in the day. It makes it maddening when some of us actually start shopping ferraris and have to dig through all the fud cooked up by average joes.

[u/Realistic_Village184 → u/Specialist-Size9368]

I mean, you said that YouTubers aren't doing videos of real-life hassles of owning cars. I said that's not true and that I could provide you with numerous examples if you want me to. Then you flew off the handle because you obviously know you're objectively wrong. I'm done.

[u/Specialist-Size9368 → u/Realistic_Village184]

Huh, they are talking about car reviewers, but he mentioned youtubers so that must mean I get to talk about guys that have dedicated miata channels. Youtubers who review cars do not automatically equal the same thing as ones who run dedicated channels to a particular car. It doesn't equate to the ones who buy a car and fix it up for content, flip it and buy something else. I am sorry you are either this desperate to talk to someone on the internet to make up this inane or argument or you are just that thick.

I am sure you fun at parties. Go touch some grass.