Site Unseen: TTAC's New Focus
In the Brave New World of electronic automotive journalism, The Truth About Cars (TTAC) squares up against some heavy hitters: KBB, Edmunds, MSN Autos and more. Separately and together, the industry leaders generate more page views than Senator Mark Foley– and us. In truth, there’s an exponential gap between their site traffic and ours. To take on these giants, to pay our writers real money, TTAC must change. Yes, we’ve broken our advertising cherry. But we need to break out of our e-ghetto. So here’s the plan.
As you know, TTAC’s editorials kick ass. Literally. But as much as I enjoy writing, editing and reading our no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners rants, as much I value your witty, passionate and knowledgeable responses, I’ve decided that TTAC’s commercial future lies elsewhere.
Quite simply, we need more of the masses to make money, and the numbers tell the tale: the masses aren’t interested in the arcane debates that float our boat. While I’m not going to deep-six or dumb-down our rants, it’s time for TTAC to re-focus our energies on our most accessible product: car reviews.
Again, rest assured that TTAC will continue to provide a steady stream of honest, literate and provocative editorials. But we’re turning this website into more of a car search widget. In other words, we’re looking to capture more of the people looking for the truth about cars they may want to purchase.
Even as we are now, TTAC gets a LOT of model searches through our Google rankings (enter the model name of a car we’ve reviewed and we’re usually on the first page or so). Once browsers click onto a review, it’s like they landed in a Swedish minimalist buff book. They don’t know what’s where, what’s what, what we’re on about and what to do next. And once they’ve got the gist, they leave.
To cater to and attract newbies, to keep their attention and profit from their interest, we’re building a new home page. It will contain one or two reviews and a simple, clear search function (for car reviews). The reviews will remain pithy, but become more user friendly. Initially, we’ll bring back the stats and stars, and add a “Why You Should Buy This Car” and a “Why You Shouldn’t Buy This Car” feature (which I designed for Jalopnik).
Eventually, we’ll add [truly] original photography and video, some way cool widgets and lots of helpful, unbiased shopping information (price comparisons, dealer recommendations, etc.).
Meanwhile, on the new home page, editorials will be accessible through title-only links to the Editorials home page. This [Swedish minimalist] navigation assumes that you, our faithful panel of engaged experts, will be able to find your new old home without delay. And again, once there, our talented writers will carry on carping in their own inimitable fashion.
So that I can devote more time and energy to developing the review side of the website, I’m appointing Frank Williams TTAC’s Editorials Editor. Working in the Department of Redundancy Department, Frank will write, commission and schedule our rants. He’ll monitor your replies and snuff out flamers. I’ll still write, but Frank will call the shots.
The basic thinking behind this review-o-centric strategy: focus. I’ve chided automakers for years for not rigidly defining their niche, staying within its confines and maintaining the long-term effort success demands. By making The Truth About Cars the world’s best car review site, I’ll be following my own advice.
Meanwhile, before, during and after our re-launch, I’d like your feedback. In this, the pre-launch phase, I need to know if you think there’s room on the web for a truly independent car review site. I’d also like to hear what functions and features you think we should add to the review mix: comparos, price comparisons, dealer locator, buyer’s club, recommended rides, etc. What should we do that “they” do? How can we innovate?
As always, TTAC lives or dies based on its ability to cater to your needs. We’ve tried tap-dancing for a living, and done well enough. But doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. It’s time for TTAC to get out of the entertainment business, into mainstream infotainment. Oh, and we're also building a MAJOR community site for launch next month (TTAC subs will get a Beta version invite.)
In any case, you have my word that TTAC will never lose its spirit or editorial independence. As the writers and I adjust to this transition, we draw strength from your past support, and inspiration from your suggestions. I will never forget that you gave me the chance to follow my heart’s desire, to work with like-minded individuals to build something fundamentally worthwhile. Thank you for your support.
More by Robert Farago
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Oberkanone Retro is great when done right. Love it. If only 06 GTO would have looked like a 69 I'd own one. 2002 Thunderbird. Hate it. New Beetle I dislike. Current Bronco is fantastic. Challenger is very good.
- Jeff Don't mind retro as long as they don't bring back leisure suits, unbuttoned shirts exposing hairy chests with gold chains, men's platform shoes, wide lapels, wide ties, big shirt collars, mood rings, shag carpet, disco, and appliances in burnt orange, harvest gold, and avocado green. Those items I never want to see again. I wouldn't mind more analog gauges and knobs and buttons. Add more cars and less suvs.
- Mic I have a '23 Limited Forester and I've learned that driving a CVT is different from an automatic slush box. I have no problems passing anyone on the highway as long as I gradually put the pedal to the metal over the course of about a second. I think it takes the computer a second to adjust the pulley ratios or something. If you just stomp on it I think it gets confused for more than a second lol. So, once you get the hang of it, it really doesn't lack torque at all. Look at CRs 45-65 acceleration times (which is a better metric than 0-60 times) and the Forester is quicker than a lot of other compact SUVs.
- Jetcal Hmmm, a choice between a VW or syphilis?
- Bd2 I hate them
Comments
Join the conversation
I know this has been beaten to death at this point, but I wanted to first say that though I complained about some of the cutesy wordplay, I do not think TTAC should tone down the attitude or the high autophile standards of its reviewers. keep the sass, just make sure the writing remains clear and focused on communicating more than being clever. second, I think the way to keep TTAC's character while also improving a bit would be to kill the 800-word limit (as many are saying) but use the extra verbiage not for a bunch of stats but for the writers to explain and justify their opinions a bit more. for example, I often hear writers here say the ride on a car is not very good, and I'd like to hear more about why they think that and what they experienced while driving it. reading such things is entertaining, informs me about the car, and also educates me about what to feel for the next time I drive. bring it on. also I think doing some point/counterpoint would be great. get a couple of your writers, if possible, to drive the same thing and duke out their opinions a bit. two expert, opinionated, literate people arguing about something fun is always interesting.
I know I'm late to the party on this, but in the new website design I am hoping that some accomodation will be made to make the site accessible and usable to visitors using PDA's and other mobile devices.