By on April 18, 2008

2008chevroletmalibuhybrid.jpgWith the notable exception of Dan Neil's work at the LA Times, the vast majority of newspaper car reviews are written to fill the spaces between automotive advertisements while sucking-up to the dealers and manufacturers who provide the ad revenue. When I caught sight of Tom Keane's take on the new Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid in the San Francisco Chronicle, I decided to see if the paper that fired TTAC's founder for his infamous Subaru Tribeca B9 "flying vagina" review had any teeth left in its automotive editorial coverage. In a word, no.

Keane didn't just imbibe the GM Kool-Aid, he cut-and-pasted it. The scribe went straight for the official press release to "explain the design" as having "a strong stance and bold proportions" and "a visually lower, yet longer, greenhouse and shorter deck [to] suggest motion and agility." It features an "aggressive, stable stance and rear-profile with Corvette cues that connects to Chevrolet's rich performance heritage."

Hey, at least Keane admitted the description came from "the Chevrolet people." But he begins the piece with his own, bold assertion. "With gasoline topping $3.50, there's no better time to drive the Malibu Hybrid."

To make his case, Keane compares the gas-electric 'Bu to the much thirstier 3.6-liter V6-powered Malibu, which gets 17 mpg city, 26 mpg highway and 20 mpg combined. He points out that the Hybrid is $4k less than this more-deluxe model. Well, yes. And it beats a Suburban LTZ by $22K, 12 mpg city and 15 mpg highway. So why not use the Yukotahburbalade if you're going to make an inherently biased apples/oranges comparison?

Reality check: the 2.4-liter four-cylinder Malibu Hybrid gets 24 mpg city and 32 mpg highway; 27 combined on the EPA test cycle. The non-hybrid model with a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine gets 22 mpg city, 30 mpg highway and 25 combined– a difference of only two mpg across the board.  In contrast, the Camry Hybrid betters its gas-powered sibling by 12 mpg city, three mpg highway and nine mpg combined.

But what can Keane do? He can't point out if you spend $4k more for the Hybrid you only gain two mpg. That might make readers think GM isn't very good at hybrids, and we can't have that. In fact, reading this paean to erstwhile pistonhead perfection, I began to wonder if Keane worked in the SF Chronicle's advertising department. You know, formally. No joke. It happens all the time. At the bottom of the review, I read © Motor Matters, 2008.

Motor Matters caters primarily to the newspaper industry. The website proudly proclaims they have "12 automotive writers to provide editorial support for your automotive advertisers." They provide "accurate, clean copy written by… people [who] are highly respected by the automotive industry." Well duh! What's not to respect for an auto exec or dealer thrilled to the gills by glowing reviews of the latest metal? Motor Matters cites the number of papers that carry their reviews as "evidence that what we produce is informative to readers and beneficial to advertisers."

Motor Matters make no bones about their complete lack of editorial integrity. Their reviewers "give driving impressions, report their findings with integrity, but not in an objectionable manner." Screw the readers, for whom an automobile is their second largest financial purchase (after their house). Screw the truth. 

Motor Matters' website provides links to suitable examples of their fundamentally unobjectionable copy, hoping to lure newspapers ready, willing and able to sacrifice editorial honesty for the good of their automotive advertisers. One of these is Keane's review of the Chrysler Sebring convertible. 

To refresh your memory, when TTAC's Captain Mike Solowiow tested the Sebring, he noted "when the trunk lid pops to swallow the top, the entire car shakes like a pole dancer, wobbles a bit and then clunks alarmingly when sealing shut." His conclusion?  "I wouldn't keep the Sebring past the standard warranty period based solely on the scary top operation… If it was my hard-earned $30Kish, I'd spend it on a Mustang GT Convertible, VW EOS, SAAB 9-3, Mazda MX-5 or ANYTHING else."

So what was Keane's take? He loved the "bright interior appearance, " the "remarkable shifting of various hardtop components as they… folded into the rear compartment" and "its attractive design." In parroting a variety of numbers provided by the factory, he cites the top's "30-second opening and closing operation" (which Capt Mike actually timed at 45 seconds). Keane closes with "this automaker offers up-scale quality vehicles with eye-appeal."  Oh, and that "their products should keep the Chrysler showrooms busy for a long time." Has he even driven past a Chrysler showroom lately?

[BTW: Keane also mentions that a Chrysler engineer accompanied him on the test drive. Nope. No bias shown there.]

We understand that automotive writers like Keane have to put food on their table. We know they're part of a corrupt system that's as outdated as some of the products they're shamelessly promoting. Sadly, we also know that the average newspaper reader is oblivious to the lies, spinmongery and propaganda perpetuated by the craven automotive press. Rest assured that as long as media outlets keep publishing crap like this, TTAC will keep sounding the alarm. And telling The Truth About Cars.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

52 Comments on “The Truth About Newspaper Car Reviews...”


  • avatar
    Antone

    Amen

  • avatar
    umterp85

    Frank: I could not agree with you more. My wife and I joke about car reviews in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Don Hammonds has not met a car he did not like—-it really becomes comical after awhile.

  • avatar
    Edward Niedermeyer

    Ah, Tom “ain’t that keen” Keane. Many a Sunday morning at the Niedermeyer ranch has been brightened by the pimp-tainment that is a good Motor Matters review. The popularity (among newspapers which are struggling to keep advertising dollars) of Keane’s “work” is probably the greatest guarantee of this website’s continued success.

  • avatar
    GS650G

    WHo cares, it’s a lame attempt at making a hybrid that is worth it. they would be better off tuning the engines for better mileage, aero changes, or dropping a few pounds to get 2 mpg

    I went toa chrysler dealership last week for a part, tumbleweeds blowing through. I could have offered a ham sandwich as a trade and they would accept.

  • avatar
    AKM

    Great op-ed! Feeling a little sharky today? it’s refreshing to read.

    [BTW: Keane also mentions that a Chrysler engineer accompanied him on the test drive. Nope. No bias shown there.]

    Was the engineer present in case the top blew up?

  • avatar

    Surprise, surprise: the “reviews” I read in the Houston Chronicle are a product of Motor Matters.

    I can’t believe how many times this style of reviewing incorporates press materials, coming to their subjective conclusions on the cut-paste quotes of employees of the manufacturers.

    People may not like my conclusions, but they can be sure its based on my subjective opinions.

  • avatar
    B.C.

    I think the more intriguing question is, how does Dan Neil still have a job at a major newspaper?

  • avatar
    Paul Niedermeyer

    My favorite Tom Keane line: “pickups aren’t only for ranchers and farmers anymore”

  • avatar
    dragofan

    My hometown paper features a review column by Ann M. Job, from The Associated Press, I believe. I saw the first one about two years ago, and they have been consistently hilarious. I think she’s one of those people who doesn’t know which wheels drive her car or where the engine is located. She’s penned lines such as “the transmission runs smooth” and “the power is good from the car.”

  • avatar
    jpc0067

    Ah, well, at least you can still get a good handjob in San Francsico…

  • avatar

    It gets worse. Click here for a report on the increasingly blurred line between newspaper-generated (yes, online too) and advertising. Excerpt: "Like it or not, the newspaper industry's increasingly grim financial outlook leaves editors with little choice but to work across the aisle. During a recent meeting at the Des Moines Register to discuss ways of revamping the paper's online local business directory, an editorial staffer asked why the newsroom was involved in a project that was so clearly aimed at generating more advertising, Register Editor Carolyn Washburn says. Washburn's response? 'This isn't a news story, but it's content and we know how to organize it better than anyone,' she recalled saying."

  • avatar
    tms1999

    Isn’t it a shiny example of the way the market economy works though? For most “classic” media, TV, newspaper, magazine, the customer is not the reader/viewer.

    The customer is the one who pays the bills, it’s the advertiser. So it does not come as a big surprise that the content is tailored to suit the taste of the customer.

    I wonder, though, how relevant pieces like these are for the general public. What are the chances that people are going to flock the local Chevy dealership (an experience in and of itself) based on the review of the Chevy Malibu (really mild) Hybrid ?

    Paying $4,000 over the base-4 for “just” 2 mpg gain is in the end a personal decision to make (which I would not, I’d rather have the nice LY7 V6, Finally a smooth V6 in a Chevy) but that is only if I really had to buy another Malibu. Which I won’t.

  • avatar
    solo84

    AMEN!!! this editorial gave me goosebumps…BRAVO MR. WILLIAMS, BRAVO INDEED!!!

  • avatar
    Darth4114

    Reminds me of a review my friend sent from a local NorCal paper (Contra Costa Times) about the Chrysler 300C, noting how it is and “engineering masterpiece”.

    Oddly enough, just looked at the article again, and our genius reviewer Tom Keane penned that one as well (http://www.contracostatimes.com/cars/ci_8570849)

    Also a side note: My friend and I discovered the Sebring’s trunk/roof action at the SF Auto Show last year. Very appalled at the level of care (or lack there of) Chrysler had at making the car feel solid. Doesn’t inspire a whole lot of confidence.

  • avatar
    romanjetfighter

    Great article, very sharky!! I love it! Dan Neil is amazing. I read his articles every week in the Highway 1 section, and his reviews are so honest and insightful. He should have his own show. Too bad no other newspaper has the balls to hire someone like him. No wonder subscriptions to newpapers are tanking.

  • avatar
    drivin98

    Great post but it should be said that the Malibu’s lame mileage figures has to more with it using the hybrid tech to make up for the lack luster 4-banger than just being really mild. They could have given it better mileage but then it would have had 4 cyl (or worse) performance so they (being GM)went for the compromise.

  • avatar
    umterp85

    romanjetfighter: “Dan Neil is amazing. I read his articles every week in the Highway 1 section, and his reviews are so honest and insightful. He should have his own show. Too bad no other newspaper has the balls to hire someone like him. No wonder subscriptions to newpapers are tanking”

    Could not agree more…Neil is a true original and always a great read. Too bad his employer (LA Times I believe) could not get more Dan Neils on their staff…..their daily subscriber rate is tanking faster than any major daily.

  • avatar
    Ashy Larry

    I’m not sure which is worse — bland, boiled-meat-and-cabbage reviews like the ones you find through Motor Matters, or the head-scratching, uninformed writing and useless commentary by hacks like Warren Brown at the Washington Post.

  • avatar
    NoSubstitute

    It’s been pretty obvious that the Comical substituted infomercials for auto-reviews some time ago. Most of the text tends to be features lists taken from press releases. From the paper’s perspective it’s a two-fer: they got to lay off their columnist and replace his work with something completely inoffensive to advertisers.

    For the record, there is an argument to be made in favor of the Malibu Hybrid, but it would have taken the author some (minimal) effort to make it. TrueDelta shows the “features-adjusted” price of the hybrid to be only about $1500 more than the base car. The Federal tax credit is $1300. Per epa.gov, the annual fuel savings at $4/gallon (if you can find gas that cheap in SF) would be almost $200. So, you’d get the price premium back after year 1, and save $ thereafter.

    There, Mr Keane, that wasn’t that hard, was it?

  • avatar
    Jonny Lieberman

    Frank: Awesome.

  • avatar
    seabrjim

    Reminds me of Tommy Kendall and whoever the racecar driver du jour is with him on the silly infomercial on speed channel. Everything he drives he just gushes over, even chrysler products!

  • avatar
    peoplewatching04

    For no particular reason, I sometimes think about Jean Jennings’ review of the Jeep Compass and it’s “Jeep Cachet” that it so wildly exudes. It’s kool-aid driven editorial crap like that which makes me happy to be an avid reader of the site.

  • avatar
    richard612

    Speaking of Warren Brown, I got into an e-mail argument with him about ten years ago when he claimed that the DOHC 5-spd Neon was underpowered on the highway. With 150hp, that car was at the top of its class at the time.

    Turns out he was downshifting from 5th to 4th when passing instead of going down to 3rd. He justified it by stating that “nobody ever uses 3rd to pass” even though the car would redline at 70+ mph in 3rd and 55mph was right at the meat of the powerband.

    Hack.

  • avatar
    philbailey

    If you really want to see pabulum being served at every meal, go read Canadian Driver.com, or watch Motoring 2008, or in the good old USA, Motorweek.

    In the words of comedian Craig Ferguson (Late, Late show):
    If it’s written down it must be true!

    And, it gets worse. AJAC, the automobile journalists of Canada, voted the Audi R8, a $100k car, as their COTY. This after a week of “testing and comparing”. I wonder how much Audi paid for that one?

    Not that the R8 is a bad car, far from it, but for the average reader, the choice is totally meaningless.

  • avatar
    Liger

    How is the Malibu Hybrid $4,000 more than the base model? The latest Autoweek has a fairly positive review of the car, and I would not say Autoweek is biased anymore than any other magazine. According to Chevy.com the base Malibu starts at $20295, the hybrid at $22790 (which is a roughly $2500 difference.) I would agree the Malibu hybrid is not a true hybrid, but when you factor in the rebate you get from the government for purchasing a hybrid, it probably doesn’t cost a whole lot more than a standard Malibu. And yes I totaly agree with the main point of this editiorial. I’ve never seen the local newspaper writer Tom Strongman(KC Star) write a negative review of any car he has driven. And he has driven some real trash, yet always posts a positive review.

  • avatar
    seoultrain

    phil, plenty of publications and journalist associations picked the R8 as their COTY. I agree with you that it’s a meaningless choice, but I get the feeling that even considering the price, it’s an amazing car. That cannot be denied.

  • avatar

    Liger : April 18th, 2008 at 6:22 pm Edit This How is the Malibu Hybrid $4,000 more than the base model? The latest Autoweek has a fairly positive review of the car, and I would not say Autoweek is biased anymore than any other magazine. According to Chevy.com the base Malibu starts at $20295, the hybrid at $22790 (which is a roughly $2500 difference.) The "front" page of the Malibu section of Chevrolet.com lists the base price of the Malibu LS as $20,295 and the base price of the Malibu Hybrid as $24,290, a difference of $3,995 which I rounded up to $4K And my issue with the review isn't with the car.  It's that he obviously stretches what little credibility he may have had trying to find something good to say about it.  It gets only 2 mpg better than the non-hybrid with the same size engine.  Why not just say that, move on, and let the chips fall where they may?  Instead he makes a bogus comparison to a more heavily-equipped car with an engine half again as large that's obviously thirstier to make the hybrid look better than it really is.  And he could have at least made some effort at paraphrasing instead of openly copying Chevy's ad copy and passing it off as a "review." 

  • avatar
    SupaMan

    And this is precisely why, after discovering TTAC, I keep coming back for the REAL truth about cars. Eg. your review on the MazdaSpeed3 was spot on when compared to my opinion based on my various test drives. You guys rock!!

  • avatar
    jthorner

    Hey, somebody has to be out there schlocking it up so that the writer and Motor Trend can pretend they really are something!

  • avatar
    Areitu

    jthorner : Pick up a Motor Trend lately?

    GM “Special Advertising Sections” look almost identical, from the layout to type font. The only difference is, GM’s ad agency takes better pictures.

  • avatar
    Steven Lang

    Great job Frank. This is far from a newspaper phenomena at this point. It’s all over the place. The internet (nctd.com), the monthly auto mags (Motor Trend has survived on it for at least 20 years now), TV (Toyota once even created a pseudo-reality infomercial to sell the lowly Tercel). Heck, even the thousands of blogs and enthusiast sites are seemingly content to proclaim a modicum of objectivity with a ton of ‘your brand sucks!’ wit. All the while they get niblets of revenue from the company’s coffers.

    The real question is, “If this is the way cars are sold, how do you think the news is sold?”

    A question to ponder…

  • avatar
    Wolven

    I appreciate the exposing of biased, bought and paid for “reviews”. It’s one of the reasons I like TTAC so much. But I must admit that I’m a bit confused…

    How is it that TTAC can so defiantly lambast the automakers faux pas and all the Kool Aid sipping newspapermagazine journalists but at the same time promulgate, without so much as a whimper, the politically correct enviro dogma in nearly every posting? Honesty, Integrity and Objectivity only apply when scrutinizing automakers? Is that it? Just curious.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    It’s been pretty obvious that the Comical substituted infomercials for auto-reviews some time ago. Most of the text tends to be features lists taken from press releases. From the paper’s perspective it’s a two-fer: they got to lay off their columnist and replace his work with something completely inoffensive to advertisers.

    For the record, there is an argument to be made in favor of the Malibu Hybrid, but it would have taken the author some (minimal) effort to make it. TrueDelta shows the “features-adjusted” price of the hybrid to be only about $1500 more than the base car. The Federal tax credit is $1300. Per epa.gov, the annual fuel savings at $4/gallon (if you can find gas that cheap in SF) would be almost $200. So, you’d get the price premium back after year 1, and save $ thereafter.

    There, Mr Keane, that wasn’t that hard, was it…..

    Well put. GM intentionally went with a “mild” hybrid version on this car, and the economic picture actually pays off in a reasonable amount of time. From a purely dollars and cents point of view most people can get a real payoff with this system without having to drive 190,000 miles. GM actually got this right!!

    How is it that TTAC can so defiantly lambast the automakers faux pas and all the Kool Aid sipping newspapermagazine journalists but at the same time promulgate, without so much as a whimper, the politically correct enviro dogma in nearly every posting? Honesty, Integrity and Objectivity only apply when scrutinizing automakers? Is that it? Just curious.…

    One is a case of pandering to those who purchase ad space. Writers with no automotive experience, or those who compromise theirs, prostitute themselves for money. At least the environmental stuff can be substantiated by the vast majority of the scientific community who have absolutely nothing to be gained by whatever the author writes. Environmental comments written by the Heartland Institute or Exxonmobil’s scientists are no less biased than Tom Kean’s automobile reviews. Less humorous, too. I almost choked over his “smart styling” and “three note” horn comments.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    “jthorner : Pick up a Motor Trend lately?”

    LOL, guilty as charged. I haven’t spent more than 30 seconds with a copy of Motor Trend in decades.

  • avatar
    dean

    A nationally syndicated column appeared in the Friday Driving section of my paper that was a completely uncritical, fawning and obsequious preview of the Volt.

    As with most such articles, it uses GM press release material for some of its content and it talks about the vehicle as though it already exists and that all of GM’s claims and design goals are in fact reality.

    Sickening.

    I have actually written to the editor of the driving section before. I can’t remember exactly what it was about, but it was spurred on by a review of the Lexus LS460h. In the letter I levelled some harsh criticism at their lack of editorial integrity (something I did again recently, this time regarding the entire paper).

    Note to self: cancel the f*cking paper.

  • avatar
    Wolven

    Environmental comments written by the Heartland Institute or Exxonmobil’s scientists are no less biased than Tom Kean’s automobile reviews.

    As opposed to the COMPLETELY unbiased “studies”, comments and “findings” paid for andor published by enviro groups… right?

  • avatar
    Steven Lang

    Hmmm… maybe the happy medium is found in academia. Anyhow getting back to the subject at hand.

    It’s VERY hard not to be influenced in this business. I would even argue that most publications can be just as influenced by their readership as by their advertisers.

    But between all the fog I would say there are moments of clarity. The MX-5, Corvette, Wrangler, Fit, Prius, Explorer and Nissan Sentra (ooohhhh, thanks for the 18 karat watch and neat pen thingy) are all representative examples of the very best in our auto industry.

    What’s that? My own pad in Vegas and enough gourmet food to satisfy a beached whale? We’re there dude!

  • avatar
    Steven Lang

    By the way, all insinuations and implications of my belief in the efficacy of the Nissan Sentra are purely fiction. No animals or minerals were harmed with the writing of the prior post.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    Environmental comments written by the Heartland Institute or Exxonmobil’s scientists are no less biased than Tom Kean’s automobile reviews.

    As opposed to the COMPLETELY unbiased “studies”, comments and “findings” paid for andor published by enviro groups… right?…

    Your are correct in that regard. However, if you remove those who profit from ignoring environmental issues (oil/energy/auto industry, etc) and those who profit from regulating it (enviro groups, industry that profit from such regulation), the remaining group of the scientific community still tilts its support toward issues like reduction of CO2 emissions, etc.

  • avatar

    Fascinating editorial. This is a lot worse than I thought. Even the Wash Post has a terrible car writer, who they’ve had for years. The guy is dull, and disingenuous. He once wrote an article for the Post Magazine trying to show that Japanese cars are not as good as American cars. It was the worst piece of illogic I’d ever seen in the Post Mag, which was a pretty decent publication when I lived in DC (I don’t see it anymore). I always wondered whether they kept him out of affirmative action (he’s African American).

    It is weird the place that cars occupy in newspapers.

  • avatar
    topaz

    Hopefully, most educated people see through the advertorial articles in the career, auto, and home sections in most newspapers that provide little unbiased or valuable information…and mostly glowing comments about their topic.

    I would go a step further and say these writers likely never drive the car, and just write the review from PR materials.

    Commmenting on Don Hammonds at the Post-Gazette (Pittsburgh), while he is always positive in his reviews, he does throw in some mild jabs where needed–just toned down compared to other objective reviewers.

  • avatar
    Garret

    This great article hits home here in Northern California. Our Sacramento paper just changed their Friday section format to be under the Advertising Dept. Wonder how the reviews are now? Most come from Wheelbase Communications, whatever that is. My guess it is similar to Motor Matters, the company mentioned above. So far all the reviews are quite glowing. Duh.

  • avatar

    One of the editors on staff at our old-car magazine used to edit the automotive section of a good-sized regional magazine. He relates the story of when he had a Volvo XC90 for a few weeks in the winter. In his writeup, he reported that over 2 weeks he got 12 mpg.

    The first phone calls were from readers. I particularly like his description of an incredulous woman who’d just put a deposit on one and insisted it was a typo. She just couldn’t believe the window sticker wasn’t right. Winter gas, he explained, cold weather, a giant heavy AWD vehicle with a V-8–would she have been surprised if it was a Tahoe?

    The second calls were from dealers. To their credit, the paper stuck up for him, but you’ll notice he doesn’t work there any more. I suggest that if you ever do see an honest writeup, it’s worth a call to the editorial desk in praise–it might mean another paycheck for someone who deserves it.

  • avatar
    solo84

    In my opinion, Motor Trend photogs take the best pictures in the industry, hands down. Road and Track and Automobile also get a nod from me for the best.

    The worst? Car and Driver and Autoweek. These two magazines are borderline boring.

  • avatar
    HEATHROI

    the chicago tribune’s Jim Mateja is bad but tends to end every sentence with probably what he thinks is a zinger but just comes off as a lame very pleased with himself expression.
    occaissionally though he lets the readers have a voice –

    Q: You seem to write only about expensive gas-guzzlers and tout highway mileage when most people drive in the city. Only rich people can afford guzzlers.

    Q: Your statemet about the Pontiac GTO lasting only a short time based on styling and performance (Transportation, March 30) isn’t quite accurate, at least as I see it.

    I didn’t buy one, but it wasn’t the looks and performance that stopped me. The moment I saw the trunk, or lack of one, I got turned off.

    The other “feature” that I wasn’t happy with was rear-wheel-drive. Here in Chicago, we get something called snow, which tends not to mix well with RWD cars.

    The people get what they deserve.

  • avatar
    Mud

    the vast majority of newspaper car reviews are written to fill the spaces between automotive advertisements while sucking-up to the dealers and manufacturers who provide the ad revenue

    EXACTLY

  • avatar
    carguy

    Well said Frank – I have worked in the newspaper industry for more than 10 years now and most have long stopped refering to their stories as news or editorial. It’s all called ‘content’ now, the writing of which is mainly outsourced to other companies. With declining paper circulation and ad revenue some are becoming increasingly desperate and are turning to Advertorials pieces such as that car review. Expect to see a lot more of it – with the exception of the bigger papers such as the LAT, WP, NYT, BG and maybe the WSJ most local papers demonstrate an inherent inability to understant their role in the age of post-paper information and will increasingly do anything to slow the decline of their revenue.

  • avatar
    hwyhobo

    the remaining group of the scientific community still tilts its support toward issues like reduction of CO2 emissions, etc.

    The good news is, whether you subscribe to global warming, upcoming ice age, or yet another fad/religion, I think at least most of us can agree we would be much better off if we managed to cut ourselves off from the bloody Middle East.

  • avatar

    When Keane writes “their products should keep the Chrysler showrooms busy for a long time”, maybe he was referring to the overflow from the service and repairs department.

  • avatar
    apdnarg

    Does anyone remember the car reviews from “Uncle” Tom McCahill in the old Mechanix Illustrated magazines? No nonsense, usually funny, and no pretensions.

  • avatar

    apdnarg :

    Does anyone remember the car reviews from “Uncle” Tom McCahill in the old Mechanix Illustrated magazines? No nonsense, usually funny, and no pretensions.

    Our spiritual forefather. RIP.

  • avatar
    Gardiner Westbound

    Surprising! Notwithstanding people with an I.Q. greater than their shoe size avoid newspaper automotive advertorials, the Toronto Star Wheels section is reportedly an outstanding revenue generator.

    http://tinyurl.com/6ofumh


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States