Toyota just can't stand the truth. Now that some of the Recall King's lousy products and obscene attitudes toward customers has been exposed, there's an air of desperation as this sorry excuse for a business seeks to recapture those good ol' days when consumers were less wary of the brand. And mainstream media, from industry giants to those less notable, are rushing to Toyota's aid. Coverup is the name. Censorship is the game.
Things are really heatin' up now that Toyota has partnered with Subaru in an effort to produce another sports car. The last thing Toyota needs is publicity about all those MR2 Spyder engines that suddenly disintegrated and Toyota's determination to stonewall the matter hoping it would eventually go away. So what if customers lost - and continue to lose - thousands of dollars on engine replacements? So what if the things fall apart at speed in heavy traffic? "So what?" says the Recall King. We got a new effort goin' now. A new model we've been callin' the FT-86 which we're now callin' the GT 86 (Scion FR-S). Definitely the time to keep it quiet about all those engine failures in MR2 Spyders.
Just think of the embarrassment it would be if Toyota had to recall a whole slew of MR2 Spyders just when they're tryin' to introduce another sports car. Not to worry. Its mainstream media to the rescue. To begin with, I noticed a flurry of "articles" singin' the praises of the GT 86 (formerly FT-86) but no comments were permitted. One of those "articles" came via Bloomberg, and I sent an e-mail to the reporter and the editor expressing my displeasure. Then I noticed the same article had also appeared in Bloomberg's BusinessWeek section, comments were allowed, and a comment I submitted had been published. So I fired off apologies. But alas. I spoke too soon. Wouldn't ya know it? My comment was removed, and a second entry was also removed.
Apologies to Bloomberg retracted, but here's the deal. I really hit a nerve when I started commenting about the GT 86 and referencing engines disintegrating in MR2 Spyders. After a mere handful of auto news websites published my comments, visits to this blog literally soared, topping 85 hits almost immediately. That's the deal, and here's the question: Instead of censoring comments, why haven't mainstream media giants such as Bloomberg - not to mention Consumer Reports - exposed all those engine failures in MR2 Spyders?
Its time for Recall King Toyota and their cohorts in mainstream media to clean up their act.
Update 11/28/2011 - Facebook has blocked a link to this post from appearing in real-time Public Posts, and apparently Facebook is also playin' games with the excerpt from the article that ordinarily appears when links to articles are posted on one's page. The excerpt section was inoperable for this blog post, but still appeared for an article I drafted linking to another media source. Note also that real-time Public Posts on Facebook are searchable via other venues such as Openbook and Bing, so Facebook's censorship tactics in this regard are more sinister than one might think.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Wired for censorship
Here we go again. As visits to this blog approach the 10,000 mark (probably closer to 13,000 if you include visits before the counter was installed), there seems to be an increase in efforts to censor comments I submit on articles regarding Toyota.
The latest instance bears an eerie resemblance to the censorship by Reuters. Last week, I read an article published by an outfit called Wired.com and decided to comment on Toyota's absurd marketing program whereby a woman was literally terrorized and has now won a court decision allowing her lawsuit to go forward. As with Reuters, I initially had difficulty logging in, even if I tried to do so using my Facebook or other accounts. After requesting password assistance, I finally got logged in, submitted my comment, and got the "comment subject to moderation" message. The comment was blocked, and submitted a second time with the same result.
So I e-mailed a complaint titled "Censorship re 9/12/11 Toyota cyberstalking article" to Kim Zetter, the person who wrote the article, stating "My comment was blocked, and I find this totally inexcusable, especially after reviewing some of the comments that were approved. If moderators are going to block comments, they should start with those that contain four letter filth and various other forms of offensive language." Interestingly enough, Zetter is billed as a "senior reporter at Wired covering cybercrime, privacy, security, and civil liberties." Emphasis most certainly mine.
Apparently, Zetter either didn't get the message, was too busy to reply, or agrees with the decision not to publish my comment. Whatever. At this time, still no replies.
Beware of Wired. They're the kinda folks who apparently don't see anything objectionable about anonymous commentary spouting four letter filth and insults, but are willing to block comments stated in a businesslike manner, devoid of obscenities, and accompanied by the writer's real name. Blatant, inexcusable censorship has become business as usual in America. And that's a real shame.
Update 9/20/2011 - I dropped wired.com a link to this post via another comment, and of course I got the "subject to moderation" notice. No problem this time. I think they'll get the message.
Update 9/20/2011 - Facebook has censored this post from Posts to Public. Glad I got it out on Twitter.
The latest instance bears an eerie resemblance to the censorship by Reuters. Last week, I read an article published by an outfit called Wired.com and decided to comment on Toyota's absurd marketing program whereby a woman was literally terrorized and has now won a court decision allowing her lawsuit to go forward. As with Reuters, I initially had difficulty logging in, even if I tried to do so using my Facebook or other accounts. After requesting password assistance, I finally got logged in, submitted my comment, and got the "comment subject to moderation" message. The comment was blocked, and submitted a second time with the same result.
So I e-mailed a complaint titled "Censorship re 9/12/11 Toyota cyberstalking article" to Kim Zetter, the person who wrote the article, stating "My comment was blocked, and I find this totally inexcusable, especially after reviewing some of the comments that were approved. If moderators are going to block comments, they should start with those that contain four letter filth and various other forms of offensive language." Interestingly enough, Zetter is billed as a "senior reporter at Wired covering cybercrime, privacy, security, and civil liberties." Emphasis most certainly mine.
Apparently, Zetter either didn't get the message, was too busy to reply, or agrees with the decision not to publish my comment. Whatever. At this time, still no replies.
Beware of Wired. They're the kinda folks who apparently don't see anything objectionable about anonymous commentary spouting four letter filth and insults, but are willing to block comments stated in a businesslike manner, devoid of obscenities, and accompanied by the writer's real name. Blatant, inexcusable censorship has become business as usual in America. And that's a real shame.
Update 9/20/2011 - I dropped wired.com a link to this post via another comment, and of course I got the "subject to moderation" notice. No problem this time. I think they'll get the message.
Update 9/20/2011 - Facebook has censored this post from Posts to Public. Glad I got it out on Twitter.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Reuters, closed session summits, and Toyota
If there's any so-called news organization I'd hate to have to depend on for facts, it would be Reuters. So it caught my eye when I read that Reuters was sponsoring a "Rebuilding Japan Summit," featuring "closed door on-the-record sessions." My interest was further piqued when I read Reuters' summit report publicizing comments by Toyota Executive Vice President Yukitoshi Funo. The report offered a rosey assessment of the company, omitting items such as recalls totalling 14 million units, record setting government fines for delays in reporting defects, a federal grand jury investigation, and a zillion lawsuits alleging coverup. Is this kind of "summit" genuine journalism? Or a cleverly contrived form of censorship?
Lately it seems there's been a sudden surge in mainstream media articles intent on ignoring facts and portraying the Recall King as some sort of innocent bystander. Meanwhile, the Toyota defect parade marches on with numerous recent recalls and the punishment of an engineer-turned-whistleblower in Vietnam. Guess I musta missed Reuters' "coverage" of the situation in Vietnam.
What Toyota, Japan, and the good ol' U.S.A. needs is something along the line of a "Toyota Engine Failure Summit" featuring reps from MR2 clubs along with past and present Spyder owners who lost thousands when their engines suddenly fell apart. Anyone who signed the ongoing oil sludge petition would also be invited to tell their stories regarding Toyota's "class action settlement." Bigwigs from Toyota, a few select congressmen, and representatives from the Department of Transportation would be on hand to field concerns, assured that the entire event would be nationally televised.
Somehow, I don't think that's the kind of summit Reuters would like to see.
Lately it seems there's been a sudden surge in mainstream media articles intent on ignoring facts and portraying the Recall King as some sort of innocent bystander. Meanwhile, the Toyota defect parade marches on with numerous recent recalls and the punishment of an engineer-turned-whistleblower in Vietnam. Guess I musta missed Reuters' "coverage" of the situation in Vietnam.
What Toyota, Japan, and the good ol' U.S.A. needs is something along the line of a "Toyota Engine Failure Summit" featuring reps from MR2 clubs along with past and present Spyder owners who lost thousands when their engines suddenly fell apart. Anyone who signed the ongoing oil sludge petition would also be invited to tell their stories regarding Toyota's "class action settlement." Bigwigs from Toyota, a few select congressmen, and representatives from the Department of Transportation would be on hand to field concerns, assured that the entire event would be nationally televised.
Somehow, I don't think that's the kind of summit Reuters would like to see.
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Reuters bans my comments re Toyota
Reuters news organization has informed me that my account has been "banned from commenting." This comes as no shock, because Reuters has previously removed my remarks regarding Toyota. This is, however, the first time I've been banned per se from expressing my opinion on a website.
The way Reuters' ban came about is interesting. A few weeks ago, I submitted a comment critical of the Recall King. It was published, but immediately removed. I resubmitted a time or two with the same result, whereupon I exposed Reuters' blatant censorship on Twitter and Facebook and submitted copies of the posts to Reuters via another comment, which, of course was never published nor did I expect it to be. Apparently, however, Reuters took notice.
Yesterday, I submitted a comment on Reuters' article regarding Toyota's latest recall of 333,000 units - RAV4s and Highlanders - for an airbag defect. What I immediately encountered was difficulty signing in, even if I used my Facebook account. So I finally requested password assistance and got logged on. Then I submitted a comment rakin' Toyota over well deserved coals for their never ending parade of defects. But unlike before, the comment wasn't published, even temporarily. Instead, I got a message that the comment would be "moderated." Apparently, that's Reutersese for "censored."
So I waited an hour or two - not expectin' much - and again fired off a complaint tweet and a post on Facebook exposin' Reuters' rebuff of free speech. Then - like before - I attempted to send Reuters copies, and that's when I immediately got the message that my account had been banned from commenting. Yessir, I'll bet ol' Reuters already knew about me exposin' 'em again on Facebook and Twitter, and decided to throw a tantrum by just flat out bannin' my remarks altogether. "That'll teach the guy to get smart with a kingpin of mainstream media such as Reuters."
If it weren't for serious issues of free speech, Reuters' childish response to my opinions about Toyota would be downright funny. Do they wish to control the dissemination of newsworthy information? Or is it merely hubris confounding common sense in the age of the Internet? Hard to say at this point, but it sure makes a body wonder what kinda relationship Reuters has with Toyota.
Rest assured, Reuters, that I'm not anywhere close to intimidated. I'll be exposin' the likes of you and Toyota every chance I get.
Update 4/23/2011 - Reuters must have complained to Facebook, because when I referenced this blog post, Facebook blocked the information from Posts by Everyone.
Update 4/24/2011 - Today I referenced this blog post again on Facebook, and the reference was published in Posts by Everyone.
The way Reuters' ban came about is interesting. A few weeks ago, I submitted a comment critical of the Recall King. It was published, but immediately removed. I resubmitted a time or two with the same result, whereupon I exposed Reuters' blatant censorship on Twitter and Facebook and submitted copies of the posts to Reuters via another comment, which, of course was never published nor did I expect it to be. Apparently, however, Reuters took notice.
Yesterday, I submitted a comment on Reuters' article regarding Toyota's latest recall of 333,000 units - RAV4s and Highlanders - for an airbag defect. What I immediately encountered was difficulty signing in, even if I used my Facebook account. So I finally requested password assistance and got logged on. Then I submitted a comment rakin' Toyota over well deserved coals for their never ending parade of defects. But unlike before, the comment wasn't published, even temporarily. Instead, I got a message that the comment would be "moderated." Apparently, that's Reutersese for "censored."
So I waited an hour or two - not expectin' much - and again fired off a complaint tweet and a post on Facebook exposin' Reuters' rebuff of free speech. Then - like before - I attempted to send Reuters copies, and that's when I immediately got the message that my account had been banned from commenting. Yessir, I'll bet ol' Reuters already knew about me exposin' 'em again on Facebook and Twitter, and decided to throw a tantrum by just flat out bannin' my remarks altogether. "That'll teach the guy to get smart with a kingpin of mainstream media such as Reuters."
If it weren't for serious issues of free speech, Reuters' childish response to my opinions about Toyota would be downright funny. Do they wish to control the dissemination of newsworthy information? Or is it merely hubris confounding common sense in the age of the Internet? Hard to say at this point, but it sure makes a body wonder what kinda relationship Reuters has with Toyota.
Rest assured, Reuters, that I'm not anywhere close to intimidated. I'll be exposin' the likes of you and Toyota every chance I get.
Update 4/23/2011 - Reuters must have complained to Facebook, because when I referenced this blog post, Facebook blocked the information from Posts by Everyone.
Update 4/24/2011 - Today I referenced this blog post again on Facebook, and the reference was published in Posts by Everyone.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Latest Toyota recall shows true colors
Moody's Investors Services' recent analysis of Toyota puts things in post earthquake perspective for Japanese automakers: Nissan considered for a credit upgrade, Honda viewed as stable, and the Recall King placed under review for another drop in credit rating. "The rating agency also said that the company's high level of incentive spending and its declining share in major markets like the U.S. indicated that consumer perceptions of the company's quality may have weakened compared with some of its competitors."
Speaking of consumer perceptions, Toyota's continuing lousy attitude toward cusotmers was epitomized by their latest recall. Thanks to a whistleblower - supported by his colleagues - media exposed several defects, including a brake problem. Then the Recall King acknowledged the defects but refused to issue a recall until an outraged public changed Toyota's mind.
Amidst Toyota's handwringing public apologies and promises to put more emphasis on customer satisfaction, here's yet another example of actions speaking louder than words. Evidence that Toyota has yet to learn any "big lessons," and will keep trying to get away with whatever it can, profits before people. As one consumer wrote, "Does
Update 4/16/2011 - The scandal has now worsened, prompting a recall of nearly 66,000 units, the largest ever in Vietnam. This is even more than the whistleblower revealed had been sold. And apparently the Recall King still doesn't get it. Toyota apologized for the recall but neglected to apologize for not listening to warnings from their whistleblowin' engineer and his colleagues.
Update 4/22/2011 - Whew. Its hard to keep up with all the Toyota recalls. Their "latest" is now a whoppin' 330,000 units for an airbag defect. RAV4s, Highlanders. Oops - yesterday (4/26/2011) Toyota announed a 51,000 unit recall of Tundra trucks re a drive shaft defect.
Update 4/27/2011 - Top Gear auto news has asked Toyota how the Vietnam recall will affect Thai-built Fortuners sold in the Phillipines, but the Recall King has yet to reply.
Update 6/19/2011 - Amidst Toyota's adamant denials of the obvious, the Recall King has now taken action against the whistleblower: http://www.thanhniennews.com/2010/Pages/20110614123057.aspx
Speaking of consumer perceptions, Toyota's continuing lousy attitude toward cusotmers was epitomized by their latest recall. Thanks to a whistleblower - supported by his colleagues - media exposed several defects, including a brake problem. Then the Recall King acknowledged the defects but refused to issue a recall until an outraged public changed Toyota's mind.
Amidst Toyota's handwringing public apologies and promises to put more emphasis on customer satisfaction, here's yet another example of actions speaking louder than words. Evidence that Toyota has yet to learn any "big lessons," and will keep trying to get away with whatever it can, profits before people. As one consumer wrote, "Does
Update 4/16/2011 - The scandal has now worsened, prompting a recall of nearly 66,000 units, the largest ever in Vietnam. This is even more than the whistleblower revealed had been sold. And apparently the Recall King still doesn't get it. Toyota apologized for the recall but neglected to apologize for not listening to warnings from their whistleblowin' engineer and his colleagues.
Update 4/22/2011 - Whew. Its hard to keep up with all the Toyota recalls. Their "latest" is now a whoppin' 330,000 units for an airbag defect. RAV4s, Highlanders. Oops - yesterday (4/26/2011) Toyota announed a 51,000 unit recall of Tundra trucks re a drive shaft defect.
Update 4/27/2011 - Top Gear auto news has asked Toyota how the Vietnam recall will affect Thai-built Fortuners sold in the Phillipines, but the Recall King has yet to reply.
Update 6/19/2011 - Amidst Toyota's adamant denials of the obvious, the Recall King has now taken action against the whistleblower: http://www.thanhniennews.com/2010/Pages/20110614123057.aspx
Friday, March 18, 2011
Toyota runs, but can't hide
Reputation for defects, known far and wide; Toyota can run, but Toyota can't hide.
Heartfelt thanks to Armen Hareyan and TorqueNews for publishing my article, "Toyota Losin' for a Reason." I'm honored to have my opinion featured. Visit TorqueNews on Facebook and TorqueNewsAuto on Twitter.
Word is gettin' out about the Recall King's lousy products and equally lousy attitude. Things have apparently gotten to the point where Toyota is experimenting with marketing efforts that seek to divert attention away from troublesome issues such as recalls, lawsuits, fines, and investigations. Meaningful info about the vehicle is all but eliminated, along with reporters' question and answer sessions. Those questions from the media can be embarassing. Much safer to spotlight a pagentry of music and models. All in unison, girls. Spell the plural of Prius.
But will it work? Will consumers be mesmerized into plunking down hard earned dollars for products no longer imbued with the mistique of a manufacturer that can do no wrong? Not likely. At least not for a stretch. Recall King Toyota must now face the consequences of deeds brought to the public's attention in a big way.
Its a little late for glitzy ads, Recall King. Try all the diversionary tactics you want, but the facts are rainin' on your parade.
Heartfelt thanks to Armen Hareyan and TorqueNews for publishing my article, "Toyota Losin' for a Reason." I'm honored to have my opinion featured. Visit TorqueNews on Facebook and TorqueNewsAuto on Twitter.
Word is gettin' out about the Recall King's lousy products and equally lousy attitude. Things have apparently gotten to the point where Toyota is experimenting with marketing efforts that seek to divert attention away from troublesome issues such as recalls, lawsuits, fines, and investigations. Meaningful info about the vehicle is all but eliminated, along with reporters' question and answer sessions. Those questions from the media can be embarassing. Much safer to spotlight a pagentry of music and models. All in unison, girls. Spell the plural of Prius.
But will it work? Will consumers be mesmerized into plunking down hard earned dollars for products no longer imbued with the mistique of a manufacturer that can do no wrong? Not likely. At least not for a stretch. Recall King Toyota must now face the consequences of deeds brought to the public's attention in a big way.
Its a little late for glitzy ads, Recall King. Try all the diversionary tactics you want, but the facts are rainin' on your parade.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Ruling supports plaintiffs re Prius brakes
Call 'em Priuses, Prii, or whatever you will (try Glitch-mobiles), but a class action lawsuit alleging defective brakes will proceed. The judge denied Toyota's request for a dismissal, and rightly so.
This lawsuit over Prius brakes stems from complaints galore, and alleges that Toyota knew about a defect years before the cars were recalled. Based on my experience, the allegations ring true. Even though the Internet is loaded with complaints of sudden engine failures in MR2 Spyders, Toyota refuses to acknowledge a defect, maintaining that the failures "could be caused by a number of things, such as not changing the oil at proper intervals." When I tried to discuss the postings from two major car clubs, Toyota's "customer loyalty" guy "didn't want to hear about all that." And NHTSA refuses to get involved because - thanks to lobbying efforts, no doubt - sudden engine failures such as those involving the MR2 Spyders are not considered a safety issue. Of course, this all goes hand in hand with blamin' the customer (sound familiar?), who winds up on the short side when it comes to having any practical recourse.
Like the lawsuit over Prius headlights, Toyota will probably settle this Prius brake case long before risking a jury decision. A jury is likely to look at the number of complaints, exercise a little common sense, and hand down a hefty tab for punitive damages.
What kind of company treats its customers in such a manner? And what kind of government lets 'em get away with it?
This lawsuit over Prius brakes stems from complaints galore, and alleges that Toyota knew about a defect years before the cars were recalled. Based on my experience, the allegations ring true. Even though the Internet is loaded with complaints of sudden engine failures in MR2 Spyders, Toyota refuses to acknowledge a defect, maintaining that the failures "could be caused by a number of things, such as not changing the oil at proper intervals." When I tried to discuss the postings from two major car clubs, Toyota's "customer loyalty" guy "didn't want to hear about all that." And NHTSA refuses to get involved because - thanks to lobbying efforts, no doubt - sudden engine failures such as those involving the MR2 Spyders are not considered a safety issue. Of course, this all goes hand in hand with blamin' the customer (sound familiar?), who winds up on the short side when it comes to having any practical recourse.
Like the lawsuit over Prius headlights, Toyota will probably settle this Prius brake case long before risking a jury decision. A jury is likely to look at the number of complaints, exercise a little common sense, and hand down a hefty tab for punitive damages.
What kind of company treats its customers in such a manner? And what kind of government lets 'em get away with it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
