Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery
This whole controversy has been a little depressing to read...not that the Tesla vs. NYT discussions here have been worse than on other forums, but just because it shows how technical minded people are as easily swayed by preconceptions and alliances as more ostensibly non-scientific minds.<p>How many words have been expended in the other HN thread to allege that Broder -- after most have already established that he is a charlatan -- is receiving oblique funding from his Big Oil paymasters? It may very well be that Broder got a swimming pool full of BP-money in his offshore hideaway...but isn't it possible that just <i>maybe</i>, that Elon Musk has a vested interest in advocating for Tesla? Like, just a little bit?<p>It doesn't have to be that Musk is trying to cover up the truth. It could just be that this is his big project and he is overly sensitive to (some of it admittedly unfair) criticism to the point where he'll see malice where there is none. It's possible: bias from sentimental influence is not unheard of in the scientific community.<p>One of the most disappointing things about Musk's response was how he closed it with an out-of-context anecdote:<p><i>In his own words in an article published last year, this is how Broder felt about electric cars before even seeing the Model S:
"Yet the state of the electric car is dismal, the victim of hyped expectations, technological flops, high costs and a hostile political climate.”</i><p>If you read that article, Broder was clearly referring to the controversy behind the Chevy Volt, which he also compared unfavorably to a "lawnmower".<p>Oh wait, that was Elon Musk who said that:
<a href="http://articles.businessinsider.com/2009-05-11/green_sheet/29962038_1_plug-in-hybrids-tesla-s-ceo-chevy-volt" rel="nofollow">http://articles.businessinsider.com/2009-05-11/green_sheet/2...</a><p>So basically, if you think Musk knows what he's talking about, then Broder spoke the truth about the Volt. Yet Musk uses Broder's assessment as a closing statement of damning circumstantial proof that Broder is decidedly anti-electric car.<p>Oh I know, this kind of cheap rhetorical trick is what all politicians and businessmen do, and it's OK if someone we all really admire does it, as long as his heart's in the right place. Maybe so, but I don't think it hurts to be a little more objective towards our heroes and realize that they can be prone to misjudgment too.