GM Inside News Can't Handle The Truth

gm inside news cant handle the truth

Jim Dollinger (a.k.a. Buickman) never met a windmill he couldn’t tilt at. Our kinda guy really. We’ve already chronicled the dealer’s battle with GMInside News (GMI). When the site’s administrators grew tired of Jim’s front line reporting and corporate criticism, they banned him from posting (later rescinded as a “technical problem”). The recently GMI-re-enabled Buickman has just informed us that he used his access to post Ken Elias’ General Motors Death Watch 201 over on the website’s forum (careful with that copyright, Jimbo). It was immediately deleted. We here at TTAC don’t mind fan boy sites, but just like the corporation it covers, GMI needs to step up and take it like a man.

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 16 comments
  • Robert Farago Robert Farago on Oct 01, 2008

    Buick61 : You are of course entitled to your opinions about the editorial independence of GMI. As you are a longtime reader of that site, I will defer to your knowledge. HOWEVER... 1. The last Buickman incident was not a "technical incident." 2. TTAC has no agreement with GMI, or any website, on any level. Further, we actively encourage dissenting opinion (including yours). [NB: GMI never contacted us to refute the chareg that they censored Jim Dollinger. If they had, we would have-- and still will-- publish their reply without editing.] TTAC accepts editorial submissions from anyone, on any subject (email robert.farago@thetruthaboutcars.com). Anyone is free to register and comment, from any perspective. We only ask that commentators observe our anti-flaming policy: no flaming the website, its authors or fellow commentators. That's it. Which your comment violates. But in the interests of clarity, I will let it stand.

  • Buick61 Buick61 on Oct 01, 2008

    Perhaps "agreement" was a bit too formal. I heard there were rustlings from TTAC, and GMI took steps to prevent an inter-site war of words, which is exactly what these Buickman posts are doing. Why should GMI be the ones that have to contact you to refute a story? Isn't that backasswards? Shouldn't you be checking the verocity of Buickman's claims with GMI before it "goes to print?" Otherwise, what's stopping you from posting any wild half truth you feel like? I feel like there should be SOME effort on your part to obtain a statement from an accused party. Otherwise, they may not even be aware that they were even implicated of doing some bad deeds, and, therefore, they wouldn't be aware of anything that needed refuting. And how have you substantiated that Buickman's log-in difficulties weren't a technical issue? I'm very well aware of GMI's bans and warnings, as I've been on the receiving end a few times. What Buickman experienced is not something they do to offending members. Ever. So why is he special? He's not.

  • Campisi Campisi on Oct 01, 2008
    Why should GMI be the ones that have to contact you to refute a story? Isn’t that backasswards? Shouldn’t you be checking the verocity of Buickman’s claims with GMI before it “goes to print? According to journalistic standards, such is certainly the case. The TTAC News section isn't really an impartial news service as much as mini-editorials with topical themes, though. At least, that's the impression I've gotten... And how have you substantiated that Buickman’s log-in difficulties weren’t a technical issue? Also a fair question, I suppose.

  • Paul8488 Paul8488 on Oct 03, 2008

    "We here at TTAC don’t mind fan boy sites, but just like the corporation it covers, GMI needs to step up and take it like a man." Buickman has had his say... over and over and over again. Compare any two Buickman posts on GMi and you will read the exact same thing: "Return to Greatness will save GM", and "Red Ink Rick is the devil". It gets a little old. I'd say Buickman has had his say, and the day he has anything NEW to add to his multiple rants on GMi he will be welcomed to do so.

Next