Lucid hit piece from this forum

[FastEddi3]

No but it was posted in here so guess it’s fair game.

It also showed up on LucidInsider as well without my permission.

Pictures are essentially always considered intellectual property as they are the product of your creativity and effort. As such, even if they have been posted on a public forum, they are still your property and usage limited to your consent. There are some exceptions to reproduction of your intellectual property in accordance with "Fair Use" guidelines (General guide to fair use). If they desire to use your intellectual property under fair use, then even in the use of public content "reporting" (only loosely fitting this into that category), they would still have to make effort to purchase or license the property.

Content producers like this rely on people not bothering to enforce their intellectual property rights. Or dragging their feet in complying with any violations, presuming that you will not go through the time and effort of enforcing intellectual property rights. You can start with a Cease and Desist demand letter and/or demand compensation for their use of your image(s).

 

[hmp10]

The writer better off look for another profession, he won’t last.

Sadly, those are the ones who last these days. Journalists who research and report unpopular or inconvenient truths in balanced fashion get canned in fairly short order. It's all about ratings and ad revenue. In the internet automotive space, we're seeing this play out with the shenanigans of Warren Redlich and the recent shift of Alex Guberman of "E for Electric" away from reputable reporting about developments in the EV space toward rebranding himself as the "great revealer" of all the dirty truths behind every EV producer's moves.

I regret to report that this trend in mainstream journalism took wing under my former boss, the legendary CEO Jack Welch of GE. At the time GE acquired RCA (and thereby NBC) the business model for network news was that it was a loss leader using highly-professional journalism to add luster to the network brand. Jack looked at the news operation and decided in short order that it, like every other GE unit, had to earn its keep by turning a healthy profit or showing a clear path to growth into a market leadership position. Part of this plan included bringing in Roger Ailes to jump start CNBC and to create what became MSNBC.

Ailes was sharp, ruthless, and openly skewed to the right politically (having helped Nixon use race-baiting to bring the southern states more into the Republican fold). Three years was about all GE could take of Ailes, and in 1996 he moved to Fox News. With him he took his talent of making ratings the golden ring of television journalism -- the talent for which Welch first recruited him.

We live with their joint legacies today. We see it in the constant rating battles among cable news providers. We see it in the widely-dispersed editorial approaches within Murdoch's news empire, with Rupert Murdoch's "The Wall Street Journal" doing responsible reporting while Fox cable news hews to the hard-right approach that draws in viewers and makes the Murdochs ever richer. This divide comes from knowing that Journal readers will not countenance the nonsense that fills the airwaves of Fox News. Fox's recent turn into even more unhinged "reporting" such as Tucker Carlson's rants about Ukraine and Taiwan is not driven by journalistic concerns. It's driven by the threats to the bottom line that the arrival of AON and Newsmax present from the extreme right and whose "reporting" antics draw viewers as to a WWE smackdown match.

MSNBC follows the same cynical business model from the opposite end of the political spectrum, and CNN is currently steering rightward with the contract terminations of journalists such as John Harwood and Brian Stelter, as it was losing ground to MSNBC (and also recently acquired a Trumpist board member).

Sorry for the long digression, but most "journalism" as practiced today is the vortex into which our political society is being dragged willingly to its doom . . . and sometimes I just can't hold my tongue.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Yeah I prefer to call most of these losers bloggers now, they don’t investigate and carefully source things, they just pre-determine the “story” and then only include information which they can distort to fit that pre-determined narrative. It’s destructive. They’re certainly not journalists of the Edward R Murrow or Walter Cronkite breed.

 

[LCIDdreams]

Hey you disingenuous controversy stoking troglodyte who wrote this, how come you ignored 100% of the positive things I said about the car, and also that that temporary power drop turtle mode I had got better and never returned and I have 8,000 miles on the car? I know why, it’s because you deliberately omit things to get clicks. I’m sure the NY Post is hiring, they love your kind of scum there.

While I don’t want to draw attention to that garbage site who has mostly been hating on Lucid since it’s inception, might be prudent here to realize excessive negativity gets used by those with malevolent intentions.

NY Post? I think Infowars is probably a better fit for him.

 

[hmp10]

Yeah I prefer to call most of these losers bloggers now, they don’t investigate and carefully source things, they just pre-determine the “story” and then only include information which they can distort to fit that pre-determined narrative. It’s destructive. They’re certainly not journalists of the Edward R Murrow or Walter Cronkite breed.

When he was at GE, Roger Ailes used to complain about the "sheep and nuns problem". He felt that if the story was about a major disease outbreak among a sheep-farming community, no one would pay attention. However, if you could spin it as caused by nuns having sex with sheep, then you had a winner on your hands. He fretted constantly that GE, despite Welch's ratings aspirations, kept his hands too tied. He flourished at Fox News because the Murdochs had no problem with nuns having sex with sheep.

To this day, I call Fox News "Sheep and Nuns News".

 

[Minnesota Mike]

I see that many of us were referenced and photos were used without permission. You can issue a takedown order via the DMCA website.

 

[Minnesota Mike]

You can issue a takedown order via the DMCA website.

Bad link. Several options at https://www.dmca.com/

 

[Minnesota Mike]

Sigh. This domain is controlled by a company in Romania and the 'author' is in Brazil. Not sure it would be worth the effort to try to enforce US copyright law in this case.

 

[idiot900]

I see that many of us were referenced and photos were used without permission. You can issue a takedown order via the DMCA website.

That would just make things look worse IMHO, even though you’d be legally in the right (as far as I, a non-lawyer, can tell).

There are “hit pieces” about everything. They’ll do it again. Or someone else will. Why worry? When my car eventually gets here, I’ll drive and enjoy.

 

[zkhan2]

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/evs-with-thin-paint-12v-battery-problems-trim-issues-they-re-from-lucid-not-tesla-200683.html?utm_source=ae_self&utm_medium=ae_moreon&utm_campaign=ae_moreon_news_static

Hey you disingenuous controversy stoking troglodyte who wrote this, how come you ignored 100% of the positive things I said about the car, and also that that temporary power drop turtle mode I had got better and never returned and I have 8,000 miles on the car? I know why, it’s because you deliberately omit things to get clicks. I’m sure the NY Post is hiring, they love your kind of scum there.

While I don’t want to draw attention to that garbage site who has mostly been hating on Lucid since it’s inception, might be prudent here to realize excessive negativity gets used by those with malevolent intentions.

Just saw this post and read the article written by Gustavo Henrique Ruffo. He seems to like to quote me all over the place. It is very unfortunate that someone can mine this site for all the negative information, which BTW was primarily here to inform other owners, and then patch it together and call it an article.

 

[joec]

That would just make things look worse IMHO, even though you’d be legally in the right (as far as I, a non-lawyer, can tell).

There are “hit pieces” about everything. They’ll do it again. Or someone else will. Why worry? When my car eventually gets here, I’ll drive and enjoy.

Agreed. I'm going to venture a guess that anyone reading that rag is not going to be in the market for a Lucid anytime soon.

When the NY Times, Wall Street Journal, etc. writes a hit piece (and they sometimes do), sure. Go after them. Actual sane people read and believe those publications. These nut job sites are not worth the effort.

 

[zkhan2]

Just saw this post and read the article written by Gustavo Henrique Ruffo. He seems to like to quote me all over the place. It is very unfortunate that someone can mine this site for all the negative information, which BTW was primarily here to inform other owners, and then patch it together and call it an article.

Had to respond via Twitter to his crap:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1579139350285406210

 

[Bunnylebowski]

I think given there are more than a dozen owners listed in his article, perhaps if you all are unhappy with both having your words used for this hit piece, and would like a correction issued to improve accuracy, perhaps we should all team up and submit our corrections to the editorial board at AutoEvolution blog. They do after all suggest it’s actually Peter Rawlinson who’s to blame for the bad quality of Tesla and now he’s just transferring that same bad quality to Lucid. Is everyone who was cited, and who’s photos were used without your permission, Ok with this? If not then let’s get together on this and send a unified email to AutoEvolution. Will it make a difference? Probably not, but it will at least let them know they will meet resistance when they steal our words, spin them out of context, steal our photos and then use it to attack Lucid and Rawlinson when in truth nearly all of us are happy with the vehicle overall.

 

[hmp10]

They do after all suggest it’s actually Peter Rawlinson who’s to blame for the bad quality of Tesla and now he’s just transferring that same bad quality to Lucid.

I'd like the author then to suggest how, if Peter Rawlinson is responsible, our 2015 Model S (closer to Rawlinson's tenure at Tesla) was delivered with fewer build quality issues than our 2021 Model S Plaid (with Rawlinson long gone), and how Lucid's build quality trumps them both. The common presence in Tesla build quality issues over the years is Elon Musk, not Peter Rawlinson.

 

[borski]

Sadly, those are the ones who last these days. Journalists who research and report unpopular or inconvenient truths in balanced fashion get canned in fairly short order. It's all about ratings and ad revenue. In the internet automotive space, we're seeing this play out with the shenanigans of Warren Redlich and the recent shift of Alex Guberman of "E for Electric" away from reputable reporting about developments in the EV space toward rebranding himself as the "great revealer" of all the dirty truths behind every EV producer's moves.

I regret to report that this trend in mainstream journalism took wing under my former boss, the legendary CEO Jack Welch of GE. At the time GE acquired RCA (and thereby NBC) the business model for network news was that it was a loss leader using highly-professional journalism to add luster to the network brand. Jack looked at the news operation and decided in short order that it, like every other GE unit, had to earn its keep by turning a healthy profit or showing a clear path to growth into a market leadership position. Part of this plan included bringing in Roger Ailes to jump start CNBC and to create what became MSNBC.

Ailes was sharp, ruthless, and openly skewed to the right politically (having helped Nixon use race-baiting to bring the southern states more into the Republican fold). Three years was about all GE could take of Ailes, and in 1996 he moved to Fox News. With him he took his talent of making ratings the golden ring of television journalism -- the talent for which Welch first recruited him.

We live with their joint legacies today. We see it in the constant rating battles among cable news providers. We see it in the widely-dispersed editorial approaches within Murdoch's news empire, with Rupert Murdoch's "The Wall Street Journal" doing responsible reporting while Fox cable news hews to the hard-right approach that draws in viewers and makes the Murdochs ever richer. This divide comes from knowing that Journal readers will not countenance the nonsense that fills the airwaves of Fox News. Fox's recent turn into even more unhinged "reporting" such as Tucker Carlson's rants about Ukraine and Taiwan is not driven by journalistic concerns. It's driven by the threats to the bottom line that the arrival of AON and Newsmax present from the extreme right and whose "reporting" antics draw viewers as to a WWE smackdown match.

MSNBC follows the same cynical business model from the opposite end of the political spectrum, and CNN is currently steering rightward with the contract terminations of journalists such as John Harwood and Brian Stelter, as it was losing ground to MSNBC (and also recently acquired a Trumpist board member).

Sorry for the long digression, but most "journalism" as practiced today is the vortex into which our political society is being dragged willingly to its doom . . . and sometimes I just can't hold my tongue.

You would agree with Bill Maher and Chris Wallace here:

 

[hmp10]

You would agree with Bill Maher and Chris Wallace here:

Absolutely. And Ted Turner also played a role in launching this downward spiral. By making news reporting a 24-hour-a-day endeavor with the founding of CNN, he triggered a demand for more news to report than truly significant news could meet. The filler began as endless repetition but soon evolved into more opining by reporters on the news they were reporting and eventually into what you see on cable news today, especially in prime-time programming: 5 minutes of news expanded into 3-4 hours of commentary, panel discussions that quickly descend into shouting matches, etc.

In the early days of television news, networks tried to differentiate themselves by the quality of their journalism. Then the battle evolved into formatting. CNN used to report a balance of domestic and global news. By tracking ratings, the coverage shifted more to domestic news to the point that these days -- aside from terrorist attacks and things such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine -- it's almost impossible to find good international news coverage on American channels. (I was in Mexico City during 9/11 and found the BBC reporting far superior to what I was seeing on CNN, as it took a much broader view of how the attack was impacting world events and attitudes. As I speak German and my partner is Polish, we subscribe to satellite channels from both those countries as well as the UK in an attempt to stay more broadly informed.) MSNBC added another wrinkle to formatting, by choosing a "main story" of the day and drilling down in it endlessly, giving ever shorter shrift to other news of the day.

Then along came Fox, which added an overtly political tilt to its news coverage based on Roger Ailes' background as a right-wing political operative that they soon realized was a ratings -- and therefore a financial -- gold mine. This, in turn, triggered a search by other television news organizations to find their own political bases, thus bringing them around to the kind of deliberately-biased reportage that has been the hallmark of newspapers and magazines since their inception.

 

[Bunnylebowski]

Absolutely. And Ted Turner also played a role in launching this downward spiral. By making news reporting a 24-hour-a-day endeavor with the founding of CNN, he triggered a demand for more news to report than truly significant news could meet. The filler began as endless repetition but soon evolved into more opining by reporters on the news they were reporting and eventually into what you see on cable news today, especially in prime-time programming: 5 minutes of news expanded into 3-4 hours of commentary, panel discussions that quickly descend into shouting matches, etc.

In the early days of television news, networks tried to differentiate themselves by the quality of their journalism. Then the battle evolved into formatting. CNN used to report a balance of domestic and global news. By tracking ratings, the coverage shifted more to domestic news to the point that these days -- aside from terrorist attacks and things such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine -- it's almost impossible to find good international news coverage on American channels. (I was in Mexico City during 9/11 and found the BBC reporting far superior to what I was seeing on CNN, as it took a much broader view of how the attack was impacting world events and attitudes. As I speak German and my partner is Polish, we subscribe to satellite channels from both those countries as well as the UK in an attempt to stay more broadly informed.) MSNBC added another wrinkle to formatting, by choosing a "main story" of the day and drilling down in it endlessly, giving ever shorter shrift to other news of the day.

Then along came Fox, which added an overtly political tilt to its news coverage based on Roger Ailes' background as a right-wing political operative that they soon realized was a ratings -- and therefore a financial -- gold mine. This, in turn, triggered a search by other television news organizations to find their own political bases, thus bringing them around to the kind of deliberately-biased reportage that has been the hallmark of newspapers and magazines since their inception.

Haha, yeah that’s pretty much the history of why now we get all our “news” from social media, because who needs journalism when you can just find an unqualified unedited schmoe who reconfirms your own biases by quoting other amateurs selectively? Viewership matters more than integrity. It’s depressing. Time to go for a drive and cheer myself up…in a car that according to AutoEvolution is a piece of crap held together by duct tape and chewing gum, but according to me and most others is the best car they’ve owned.

 

[stratus]

Haha, yeah that’s pretty much the history of why now we get all our “news” from social media, because who needs journalism when you can just find an unqualified unedited schmoe who reconfirms your own biases by quoting other amateurs selectively? Viewership matters more than integrity. It’s depressing. Time to go for a drive and cheer myself up…in a car that according to AutoEvolution is a piece of crap held together by duct tape and chewing gum, but according to me and most others is the best car they’ve owned.

I’m about to do the same . It’s October and 74 degrees here, so I better take full advantage of my little golf cart ( according to me EV hating acquaintances).

 

[joec]

Haha, yeah that’s pretty much the history of why now we get all our “news” from social media, because who needs journalism when you can just find an unqualified unedited schmoe who reconfirms your own biases by quoting other amateurs selectively? Viewership matters more than integrity. It’s depressing. Time to go for a drive and cheer myself up…in a car that according to AutoEvolution is a piece of crap held together by duct tape and chewing gum, but according to me and most others is the best car they’ve owned.

I have a simple set of rules for news. No TV. Newspapers only (digitally, of course, via RSS feed). No op ed pieces.

Basically, just the facts. Reports of events. Zero commentary or opinion.

Then I do this weird thing where I think about what I just read and form my own opinions?

Strange concept, I know.

 

[jpcornett]

We can’t have it both ways unfortunately. No one was complaining when all the stories about Lucid were positive when we all knew that there were issues with software and it seemed to be deliberately left out of stories.

The article is horribly written but maybe if the mainstream media and reviewers actually reported the good and the bad then these hit pieces wouldn’t occur. It’s annoying to see and even more annoying that a pic of my car is in the article but again, if true reporting was actually done in the first place this could’ve been avoided.

I have also had 12 v failure