Horrible Article About DeLorean Car and Person.

[Lenny]

Who pissed off the Australian's?
http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/moguls-john-delorean-creator-of-the-renowned-dmc12-dud-20150119-12tijq.html

We drive aluminum cars, the doors won't close, etc, etc.

[ccurzio]

My comment. (Let's see if it gets approved.)



There is so much wrong in this article it's not even funny. The body of the DMC-12 is Stainless Steel. It's not "aluminium-bodied."

"the tall, fast-talking American had built a car with his name in it twice." - The car was marketed as the DMC-12, not the DMC DMC 12. (You don't see Mustangs being sold as the Ford Ford Mustang.)

Claims of it being "undercooked"? The specs of the DMC-12 were comparable to the same-era Corvette. "woefully put together"? It's a brand-new first-gen design from a GM engineer. The company didn't last long enough to iron out the kinks, but there are plenty of DMC-12s still on the road.

"As the car company breathed its last in late 1982, DeLorean was arrested with 100 kg of cocaine." - No he wasn't. Long story short, he was caught on video having a meeting with people who presented him with cocaine and said that this is what they were going to sell, and if he invested in their operation he'd make serious profits, which could then be invested back into DMC. The people who set up the meeting were Federal agents, hence the successful entrapment defense.

"If it was a typical DMC-12, they were in that position because they wouldn't go back down." - What is this even supposed to mean? If the doors were to ever fail, they would fail in the CLOSED position either due to a failure of the torsion bar or the struts.

Tony Davis? This article is dreck, pure and simple.

Side note to Lenny: Australian's? You don't pluralize with an apostrophe. It's Australians. :)

[AugustneverEnds]

Tony Davis should be flogged with a kangaroo tail just for the inaccuracies alone!!

[mluder]

Here was my comment... Let's see if it gets posted.

"HI, Tony Davis.
Congratulations on getting your first article published! I can only assume it's your first article as It's complete dreck full of mistruths and outright lies.
Oh... I'm sorry... Maybe you don't have access to the internet yet where you live. That probably explains why you were unable to research any of the "facts" in this article. I'm really sorryy, I didn't mean to offend you and your lack of intelligence... Then again I'm sure you didn't mean to offend Mr. DeLorean and his surviving family members with pure case of libel.
Anyway... good luck on your continued education at journalism school. Keep studying hard and maybe one day you'll be able to work for Fox News. I understand accuracy is not important there so you should fit right in.

Cheers
Steven"

[kajcienski]

Here was my comment... Let's see if it gets posted.

"HI, Tony Davis.
Congratulations on getting your first article published! I can only assume it's your first article as It's complete dreck full of mistruths and outright lies.
Oh... I'm sorry... Maybe you don't have access to the internet yet where you live. That probably explains why you were unable to research any of the "facts" in this article. I'm really sorryy, I didn't mean to offend you and your lack of intelligence... Then again I'm sure you didn't mean to offend Mr. DeLorean and his surviving family members with pure case of libel.
Anyway... good luck on your continued education at journalism school. Keep studying hard and maybe one day you'll be able to work for Fox News. I understand accuracy is not important there so you should fit right in.

Cheers
Steven"

Most excellent!

[Soundkillr]

Just an FYI, Don't let this turn into a political thread based on your response to them. I don't want to hear complaints about how the same could be said about msnbc and CNN.

[Kozmatic]

Just an FYI, Don't let this turn into a political thread based on your response to them. I don't want to hear complaints about how the same could be said about msnbc and CNN.

Exactly

[Jonathan]

Do any articles or opinions keep their credibility or believability when they've resorted to name calling?

If there's mention of the subject's physical appearance, whether it be showpony, freak, fatass or something else equally irrelevant, doesn't the article get thrown into the same trash bin as the classifieds or cartoons do? (ok, maybe not cartoons, some of those are actually worth reading.)

[mluder]

Do any articles or opinions keep their credibility or believability when they've resorted to name calling?

If there's mention of the subject's physical appearance, whether it be showpony, freak, fatass or something else equally irrelevant, doesn't the article get thrown into the same trash bin as the classifieds or cartoons do? (ok, maybe not cartoons, some of those are actually worth reading.)

I don't think I ever resorted to name calling in my response... I merely attacked is abilities and qualifications as a journalist. That's a long way from calling some one fat. Is critique no longer allowed? Can we no longer say that person is a terrible director or painter or...?

OK - I admit the barb about Fox News may have taken it too far...

Cheers
Steve

[ccurzio]

Eh, "lack of intelligence" is kind of insulting, and the whole comment is pretty mean-spirited and attacking.

I stuck to the facts in my critique, and didn't attack the author personally.

But no worries, my comment wasn't accepted.

[Jonathan]

Hey Steven and Chris,

No worries on either of your comments. I wasn't making reference to them at all to be honest when I posted.

I should have clarified a bit better what I meant though...

The name calling bit for the article came from seeing "showpony" or the other descriptions that called JZD out in a negative way, and that really had/have nothing to do with designing a car. All they do is sway the reader into thinking the way of the author by throwing out something negative about the subject before going on with the rest of the article.

Think of it this way, if you read a headline and it started with "Our courageous President said..." or "The young, vibrant CEO announced..." you are going to go into the article thinking something good about the person just because of the way the opening was phrased. Conversely, if it reads "Our money-wasting President..." or "The college-dropout CEO announced..." you're already thinking something negative before getting to the story itself.

Personally, I just view any of that as a piss-poor way of covering a story because it just says the guy is using childish tactics to get the reader to agree with him.

The part I mentioned about "comments" doing the name calling and the "fatass" one in particular, was just my trolling way (sorry) to mention the flavour of the comments made this week against what Michael Moore had to say about the American Sniper film. It seemed every tweet or rebuttal article didn't give the idea or thought a chance to be discussed or debated because they opened with calling him a fatass or slob or mentioning his wife left him.

Yea, the fatass one doesn't apply to DeLorean, I just used it as an obvious example. If you're unfortunate enough to have to sit through a segment of Coaches Corner while watching Hockey Night In Canada and listen to Don Cherry go on ranting about something, he often will accidently on purpose mispronounce some guy's name, usually a European, because he wants to chastise him for wearing a visor or some other crap. It just comes off biased because of childish name calling stuff that really had nothing to do with whether the guy had a valid point or he didn't. Leave the irrelevant stuff out of it and pick apart the guy's comments or theory or article by attacking what he said and not what the guy looks like.

You guys did that fine with the DMC article of course. Adding sarcasm while pointing out all the ways this article messed up details is fine with me. Yea, he doesn't come across all that intelligent to me either. Not from what I read anyway.

[David T]

Who pissed off the Australian's?
http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/moguls-john-delorean-creator-of-the-renowned-dmc12-dud-20150119-12tijq.html

We drive aluminum cars, the doors won't close, etc, etc.

A lot of people have this attitude, especially in the UK. Because Australia is part of the UK I can see how that same attitude can be there. When DMC failed the government blamed JZD and made him to look like the "Bad Guy". Never mind they LOVED him in the beginning and thought all of the jobs he would create in Ireland would help to solve "The Troubles" as it was called. JZD held up his end of the bargain but when things went bad everybody started to blame each other. JZD tried anything to save his company and what he got for it was that entrapment charge with the Coke. Never mind the charges were for money laundering, no one cares about the finer points. The Lotus people blame JZD for Colin Chapman's heart attack because of the government investigation into CC's finances. After the lawyers finish shooting, the accountants go in and bayonet the wounded. Remember, the winners are the ones who get to write the history. There are few left to stand up for JZD and DMC.
BTW he got one thing right, car companies ARE named after the people who started them. And if you can't afford a car you name your kids after it like Mercedes and Lexus!
David Teitelbaum

[DrJeff]

David T... I think you mean Australia was part of the British Empire. It is not now and was not part of the UK. It is part of the British Commonwealth, as are many other countries. I think many current day countries that were once part of the British Empire would laugh at the suggestion that because of that historic association that they might have similar views on the Delorean and JDZ.

[David T]

David T... I think you mean Australia was part of the British Empire. It is not now and was not part of the UK. It is part of the British Commonwealth, as are many other countries. I think many current day countries that were once part of the British Empire would laugh at the suggestion that because of that historic association that they might have similar views on the Delorean and JDZ.

They make a big deal about the Queen and the royal family. They still consider themselves part of what was the British Empire. Most of their laws are derived from there and they never revolted and fought British rule. They drive on the wrong side of the road! You are correct, this is only my opinion. There are posters here that live in Australia. It would be interesting to hear from them.

[DrJeff]

And here I was hoping that "Australia is part of the UK" was just a typo.

[Tillsy]

On behalf of Australia I apologise for this wanker and his article.



They make a big deal about the Queen and the royal family. They still consider themselves part of what was the British Empire.

Actually this is far from correct.

Firstly a large percentage of us have wanted a republic for a very very long time now. Unfortunately the referendum we had on the matter 16 years ago was handled very badly - instead of being a vote for whether to become a republic or not, it was for a very specific proposal that nobody wanted. Obviously we can't talk politics here, so suffice to say that a change of something happened before the referendum and the design was changed and a certain influential person pushed his personal views on the public. To that end, rightly so, that version of the republic was voted against - after all who wants a president that is little more than a puppet for the prime minister and even sackable by the prime minster.

Secondly, despite what happened with the referendum in 1999, we've been distancing ourselves anyway. The Australia Act was brought in that, in a nutshell, basically separates us from the empire aside from sharing the Queen. Over time almost every reference to the Queen has been abolished - for example the Oath of Citizenship no longer asserts allegiance to the Australian monarch but instead loyalty to Australia and her people, in the legal profession we no longer have Queen's Counsel but have Senior Counsel, references to "Royal" have either been replaced or being phased out, and new institutions are prohibited from using the word Royal in their name anymore. All this might seem minor, but it directly addresses your comment - we used to make a very big deal out of the Queen, now we make no reference to her anywhere anymore.

Hope this helps, been tough to explain without making specific references that cross lines of political discussion.

[Citizen]

On behalf of Australia I apologise for this wanker and his article.

... been tough to explain without making specific references that cross lines of political discussion.

Actually, I think you did a great job. Thanks for the explanation, it helped me. Understanding and knowledge is power.

And to our friends down under, thanks for being a great country, and friends to both the US and the UK.

...

[eagle-co94]

Sounds like someone got burned on a purchase or simply has a grudge against someone that likes DeLoreans. I can't see a reason for typing such a short article with so much bad information.

[SIMid]

What a shame we can't flag it as inappropriate.

I too, had made a comment and non of us had them approved. You would think they would just delete the article.

[LordFly]

Weird, no mention of the ford V8 that came stock in the car ;)