• HollandJim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Again, nonsense on your part. First off, here’s an example of exactly what I mean:

    Everything is a horse race to this site, and they have to squeeze in any comparison they can, and right there in the sub header.

    Secondly, I’m not mentioning GM at all; don’t move the goalposts, if you don’t mind.

    I’m specifically commenting on how they (and Electrek, to a lesser degree) can’t seem to write about a car company without mentioning Tesla by comparison. That is constant promotion on their part, and not in any way fair reporting.

    • pedalmore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      This whole post is about GM’s ultium issues, which are very much real. You’re the one bringing up Tesla unnecessarily and attacking the source. This may be uncomfortable for you, but GM and Ms Barra herself talk about Tesla all the time, and it’s not surprising that EV news blogs also talk about Tesla a lot - they are the elephant in the room (at least in the US). The article also mentions Honda, and Kia-Hyundai too. Is that a sign of horrific bias too? It’s a long and detailed article that barely mentions Tesla, and only in relevant ways - GM has stated they will pass Tesla by 2025 (ok sure) and the talent comment. Your entire bias argument rests on the word 'Tesla" being in the article twice, not anything of substance, and that’s not even what we’re here to discuss.

      I don’t even like Tesla personally and won’t consider buying one unless Elon is long gone and they make some design changes. But I won’t buy an ultium car for quite sometime either, because it’s a hot mess.