" We polled our staff and contributors, whose prejudices have resulted in a fascinating take of the nature of automotive coolness. We whittled their selections down to a highly subjective list of the 100 Coolest Cars"
Yawn... in case ya'll didn't know... car mag guys are some of the most...
This is really odd. I had forgotten all about this thread. Talked to a client yesterday that had a mysterious implosion too... in a BMW's sunroof. Caused her to lose control of the car and roll it. She's ok. I wonder if this is related?
A responsible thing to do anytime you hand Viper keys over to anyone who has never driven one before... even though some members here don't seem to think so.
Look Chuck... just because YOU wear a padded bra doesn't mean you can make us wear em. :rolaugh:
Besides, said bra adds 2 ounces to the car's weight. :lmao:
That still doesn't address my point that journalistic integrity should not allow them to title an article as such, leave out the obvious, and not briefly address it in a line or two. I've read plenty of articles where they initially state why they don't have this car or that car.
To sum up...
If that's the case, journalistic integrity would dictate you indicate this in the article. Yeah, we know you rub elbows with these special people, but do you sit in on the editorial meetings?
44 out of a billion vettes made vs 15 out of around 25k Vipers made... I think Vipers made a better showing! :D
But what really matters are the kids... good job to both clubs! :2tu:
As someone who have consulted "ads for content" companies... this is 100% true. Nothing is ever overtly "ordered," but plenty hinted by the advertiser and enforced by the editors. I've said this before... count the number of ads for GM cars vs Chrysler cars... it's pretty obvious then.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.