Rebuttal Redux: NY Times responds to Musk's "douchebag" comment
Click above and scroll down to watch the video
We've never actually conducted a scientific poll on the subject, but we'd be willing to bet that nobody likes being called a douchebag. Such is the case with an otherwise respected journalist for The New York Times named Randy Stross, who you might remember as the writer that questioned whether Tesla Motors should qualify for low interest loans from the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) program.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk took exception to Stross' opinions, and he made his feelings known in a video interview with Yahoo! Tech Ticker's Sarah Lacy. This is where the nasty slurs heard 'round the net come in, and Tim O'Brien, an editor for The Times reportedly takes issue with both Musk's statement and the reaction from Lacy, the interviewer.
Setting aside the objectionable language used to describe Stross, O'Brien points out that The Times did not print a retraction as Musk suggested in the video. A correction was made to the story to reflect that the DOE loans would help fund the development of the $50,000 Model S, not the $109,000 Roadster. Still, a correction is not the same as a retraction.
The real story, though, remains whether or not Tesla Motors will get funding from the ATVM program, which is something Elon strongly feels will indeed happen. Read the full story here.
[Source: The New York Observer]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Richard 3:27PM (4/17/2009)
If Elon Musk can't say it I will. Randy Stross is a douchebag. He's a man that tried to persuade his reading public to believe what was not true. He deceived the readers about the fund source, He's a man that doesn't understand the meaning of a concept vehicle and production vehicle. Finally, he doesn't understand economics one bit. in fact I doubt that he's ever read one book on economics. I doubt he understand much of anything. He's a writer with a gift of getting all his information wrong and making you think wrongly about a subject. A reporter is supposed to give unbiased stories with no interpretation. That's not what Randy Ross is. Again, Randy Ross is a douchebag...
IMHO. No harm meant, Randy Ross. I'll write a "correction" tomorrow.
Reply
Arthur 4:09PM (4/18/2009)
The NYTimes is itself a douchebag paper. They've been chasing Google ever since they proclaimed don't be evil. At the same time, they apologize for Microsoft. They defend the GM bailout, and yet they want to deny funds to Tesla. They are cynical to the extreme, and pay no regard to doing what's right.
jzj 4:06PM (4/17/2009)
The NYTimes disappoints by claiming they merely corrected a line: the line that had to be re-written was the thrust of the headline, the thrust of the story, and the thrust of the opinion piece (that public monies would only go toward a rich-man's car, when in fact this is simply untrue). If the NYTimes wants to generally stand behind its writer it is entitled to do so, but not at the expense of the truth and certainly not by seeking to belittle another writer who, by contrast, got her facts straight.
Reply
jpm 4:26PM (4/17/2009)
Yup it's safe to say Randy Ross is a douchebag. Good job Mr. Musk. Randy, you can stfu now.
Reply
ljbad4life 4:58PM (4/17/2009)
that douche bag comment was hilarious and out of left field, seriously though for so NY times to be harping on a Tesla, but not say a word about gm wanting 10 billion dollars for the volt. The Model s is within 10k of the volt.
Reply
Nick 5:31PM (4/17/2009)
Randy Stross IS a douchebag, that's why Musk called him just that.
Hey Randy, if you're reading this, F U man!
Reply
Chris M 6:40PM (4/17/2009)
Well, it was impolitic and a bit rude to say that. Musk could have said that Stross was wrong, didn't understand, or needed to get his facts straight, he didn't really need to use that insult.
But I must admit, it was a very amusing and well deserved insult!
Reply
Aaron 10:46PM (4/17/2009)
Well, Musk saying that got him in the news. Had he just said "that guy was wrong," everyone would have ignored it. No sound byte, no news. As it was, he was all over the place with that remark. Even I succumbed and wrote about it on Zoomilife. :)
AlGore 10:42PM (4/17/2009)
How dare you evil CO2 emitting human trash say nasty things about the beloved New York Times! They are the greenest tree killing rag on the planet! Your days are numbered, human scumbags with your nasty gaseous emissions!
Reply
Ken 10:34AM (4/18/2009)
Regardless of whether or not I agree with Musk (which I do), John Koblin of the NY Observer needs to chill out. Most of the article is questioning Lacy's conduct of the interview ... which would obviously be unacceptable if it was a REAL news interview.
This was a relaxed, informal, tech interview, not one for constructing a real print news story that needs to be verified through the normal processes of journalistic review. Someone in her position needs to bring a level of entertainment to her work to be successful and it's then up the the viewer to decide if the interview was objectively conducted (hint hint, shes a freelance tech reporter in silicon valley ... of course shes going to be more aligned with Musk than Senior Douchebag)
Reply
Evie 12:01PM (4/18/2009)
Some pretty nasty responses to the idea the reporter suggested which is that fully electric are very high priced products, and the government is not really supposed to be in the business of providing four fifths of the funding of a venture for a private company.
So the nasty retorts to Randy should focus more on the core issue and not personalities, is it in fact good for the government to pick companies to give money to instead of providing a level playing field. Fisker gets 60 million plus and Elon goes to the government for multiples of the current company value. Maybe some of the greenies don't know it ought to work but that isn't it. Elon knows the venture community, what in fact does he need the 300 million for, there are empty plants all over the place, or he can have the product contract manufactured.
And maybe the kids think calling someone a douchebag in a public forum is a briliant thing, I don't but Elon wanted to short change and intimidate the press from asking hard questions. Who in the government has guaranteed him money behind the scenes, why is his company being chosen over dozens of others, nice job mcnastys trying to short circuit reasonable scrutiiny of the issue. Elon needs to run a business, with a lot more private money relatively in the contribution compared to what he is doing. I suspect that the California political brigade that told him his money was a sure thing (while the state is basically hurting) will now get scrutiny from the real financial providers in question, the US government.
So maybe the journalist took a position, or asked uncomfortable questions, so what. Maybe we should have had a lot more scrutiny and difficult questions during the financial debacle, or the meltdown of Detroit which started way before the financial crisis by the way.
Distill it down, Elon wants the federal government to basically sponsor his business, in comeptition to many others, for a vehicle that most analysts think will be significantly priced out of relevance to the market.. I would look forward to debate with any of the posters who wanted to just criticize the journalist without delving into the questions. Maybe you will go against people who know a lot more than you and this type of millions from the government could use a lot more vetting. If you haven't heard yet we are in an economic crisis and government selectively sponsoring selected businesses is not a good move. The journalist can't hit back, but I think in the public court the idea of a business getting selective funding for most, repeat most of their operational costs would just not work. The hedge funds have billions, why do they not want to invest? Hmmm, maybe Elon should work more on hitting his deliiverables targets.
Reply
Randy S 1:00PM (4/18/2009)
Awe.... Evie.... STFUp man!
Why did you have to go and ruin such a good read....
I was really enjoying this thread with lots of laughs along the way
Damit man.... why do you have to be such a douchbag?
Evie 1:14PM (4/18/2009)
R,
Pretty much the kinds of comments I would expect instead of a response of someone who actually knows the issues and can defend their point of view.
Evie would have you running in circles and basically admitting you just don't know very much about what you are talking about.
Better stay in the shallow end of the pool.
Evie thinks such a response (yours) is the mark of a defeated mind
Yggdrasilly 1:16PM (4/19/2009)
Late in childhood she discovered her mutant ability: the power to enrage and alienate even people inclined to agree with her!
By day disguised as a mild-mannered polemecist, by night Ayn Rand stalks the streets of New York as--The Gray Lady!!
Reply
Ernie 3:42PM (4/20/2009)
From the article:
Mr. O’Brien said that the story first caught his attention when he saw it pop up on—where else?—Twitter on Friday.
“I saw the headline and it said something like ‘Elon calls NYT writer Randall Stross a douche bag’ and I was like whoa-ho!” he said. “I clicked on it and there it was. It was so ridiculous that it was entertaining. It was so misguided and inaccurate and I was stunned at the poor quality of the journalism.”
Oh, there's the pot calling the kettle black right there. "Misguided and inaccurate" is what I would call the NYT article, right along with "stunned by the poor quality of the journalism". It's just that we've come to expect that with the press corps these days.
Reply
dumbass 6:37PM (4/20/2009)
Evie,
You are the ignorant type of person that would back R. Stross. You see, your logic is flawed. You have a problem with the govt loaning money for "his" business. Well what the heck do you call the Tarp bailout to GM and Chyrsler? Chrysler is a private company which is getting billions and you don't have a problem with that but you have a problem with Tesla asking for a tiny amount of the ATVM loan? People like you are exactly the ones that make stuff up to believe that you're better than others because you can't see the facts for what they are. Do yourself a favor and read and edumacate yourself. LOL
Reply