It's a crazy world out there, Spies. You can't even write an automotive review anymore without being accused of owning stock in a company or being a shill for other big corporate interests via social media.
This is exactly what happened to The Wall Street Journal's Dan Neil when he praised the all-new Tesla Model 3 Performance.
Not only was he catching flack from mom and pops, the hedge fund crowd came slamming down on him. It can't have anything to do with their short books and Neil's super-positive thoughts on the vehicle, right?
While I don't always agree with Neil's evaluations and I do find him to be a bit of a navel gazer — winning a Pulitzer Prize will do that to you — one thing I've always noted is that he tells the story as it is. You may not like it but that's his perspective.
Because of all the "ish" he was catching, he actually deleted his Twitter account. What's that tell you, Spies?
...On Friday, The WSJ published Neil’s review of the new Tesla Model 3 Dual Motor Performance model. The review was short—more a first drive test than a full review—but a largely glowing take on the hottest Model 3 to date. To Neil’s credit, it also kept things balanced by pointing out some flaws in the Tesla facade. It is possible to have mixed feelings about Tesla, after all, and Neil is nothing if not professional.
The review was circulated widely by Tesla critics and lovers alike, and it didn’t take long for the @ replies to start piling in...
Read Article