Is Tesla Finally Ready to Advertise?

is tesla finally ready to advertise

As you likely know, Tesla doesn’t do traditional advertising for its vehicles. Or much in the way of social-media advertising, either. That’s because Tesla is often considered “cool” and partly because of the cult of personality cultivated by boss Elon Musk.

That might be about to change, according to one report.

According to InsideEVs, Musk said in an interview that there may be some advantages after all.

For example, he believes (incorrectly, we’ll get to that in a second) that other automakers are getting special treatment from media outlets because they buy advertising.

“There’s an argument for maybe we should advertise because the traditional media will not run negative pieces about automotive. Because automotive is like one of the biggest—if not the biggest—advertisers in their paper,” he said.

This is, for the most part, bullshit. While there are exceptions — remember the flap involving auto critic Scott Burgess and his paper, when Burgess got mad about a review of his being watered down by editors to curry favor with Chrysler? — for the most part, advertising is separate from editorial. Over the years, I’ve seen readers write to the buff books complaining about this, only to be sarcastically taken down by editors who revealed the truth that reviews aren’t swayed by ads.

Certainly, we here at TTAC aren’t swayed — and the ads that run alongside our reviews are something that no one here has control over. Most are programmatic, others were sold by our corporate masters, with no involvement from myself or anyone else on the masthead. I’ve even written op-eds that were critical of OEMs that bought ad space from our corporate parent and took some guff for it — and I’ll do it again, even if I again take flack from above.

Also, if we at TTAC became aware of an outlet compromising its ethics because of advertising and could prove it, we’d cover it.

Ahem, back to Musk.

He then goes on to say that not having a PR team also hurts Tesla.

“So Tesla is basically free game [for traditional media]. Whereas, its [sic] safe to say that if they run some negative piece about General Motors right next to a General Motors ad, a General Motors marketing executive would call them and say,’ um—why did you do that?”

Again, he has the latter part wrong — generally speaking, I’m not aware of PR or marketing types calling journalists just because a negative piece or review ran near an ad. Speaking only for myself, every time I’ve gotten a call from a PR rep angry about something I/we wrote it’s either because we screwed up a fact or because they felt we were unfair in how we approached the piece. Or because they wanted to make the case that the company is aware of a vehicle’s flaws and the next model will be better, honest.

It’s never, in my experience, been about ads, though I acknowledge the possibility that things might be different in the print magazine world — my experience is mostly in digital. But again, from what I hear, the print books generally don’t let ad placement dictate the tone of editorial copy.

Aside from that, didn’t I say that Tesla was hurting itself by not having a PR team? Yes, yes I did.

Elon Musk is starting to show me, based on his tweets and public statements, that as smart as he is, he’s woefully uninformed about certain aspects of this business, other businesses (see: Social-media moderation), and life in general.

OK, we’re skidding towards the weeds like an overconfident driver in an overpowered car on a track day, so let’s tap the binders and tighten the line. Snarky but accurate broadsides at Musk aside, it’s unusual that an automotive company would spend $0 on advertising in Q1 2021 when the auto industry dropped $12 billion on it in 2020. Then again, Tesla, a small company trying to make it as a startup and one that’s heavily focused on EV and autonomous-driving tech, spends more on research and development than other OEMs. So Tesla could argue that the money it spends on R&D is going to something even more important than advertising.

Still, it’s almost unheard of for a car company, even one as well-known as Tesla, to not market its wares.

InsideEVs further points out that EV ads from other automakers, plus automakers taking shots, however subtle, at Tesla, have helped Tesla get attention from consumers. So Tesla gets some attention via the actions of its rivals, without having to lift a finger or spend a dollar.

Tesla has been in a unique position — for a variety of reasons, including those mentioned in this article’s lede, it has never really needed to advertise. Yet advertising probably wouldn’t hurt the company, especially if Musk could address legitimate criticisms about low build quality and the misleading use of “full-self driving” to describe Tesla’s autonomous driving tech.

We’ll see if Tesla ads grace our TV screens anytime soon. Until then, it continues to be interesting to see Musk learn the lessons that long-time automotive executives learned decades ago.

[Image: Tesla]

Join the conversation
3 of 24 comments
  • Jkross22 Jkross22 on Jun 26, 2022

    If you know what you want, 80% of the work is done. Problems are introduced when buyers are not educated/knowledgeable/savvy/confident enough to give a seller a number to hit and sticking with it. Negotiating a car purchase isn't much different than negotiating a starting salary for a job. Know what you want, be reasonable and be prepared to walk away. Age has nothing to do with it. I have avoided many long trips to dealers who were swinging for the fences on pricing. Most asked me to 'come on down and talk about it.' Nah, the internet and phones have made negotiating much less time consuming and stressful.

  • THX1136 THX1136 on Jun 27, 2022

    The article reminded me of the ad 'campaign' that Ford undertook many years back. The tag line - At Ford, Quality is Job 1." Now whether or not that was realized in the vehicles they made during that period is unknown to me personally. Ads, in my mind, are all about planting the message the advertiser wants planted in the minds of those seeing/hearing the ads. It's mostly on the subliminal level. Over time during that campaign I would guess if one surveyed the general population, folks would respond that they generally think Ford made quality vehicles. The ads worked if that was the case. The hard part is making certain that 99.9% of the Fords sold were, indeed, quality vehicles. When one fails to follow through, public perception is just as easily changed through experience.

    • Jeff S Jeff S on Jun 28, 2022

      Those old Volvo ads during the 70s were very effective and the VW ads. I remember one VW ad where it showed the Smith family and then it show the Kempler family with the inexpensive but reliable VW Beetles with the slogan "Now its keeping up with the Kemplers". The other ad was for the new semi automatic VW Beetle in 1968 with a character dressed up as William Shakespeare "The question is to shift or not to shift that is the option". Those are car ads I can still remember they got the message across with some humor added.

  • Dennis Howerton Nice article, Cory. Makes me wish I had bought Festivas when they were being produced. Kia made them until the line was discontinued, but Kia evidently used some of the technology to make the Rio. Pictures of the interior look a lot like my Rio's interior, and the 1.5 liter engine is from Mazda while Ford made the automatic transmission in the used 2002 Rio I've been driving since 2006. I might add the Rio is also an excellent subcompact people mover.
  • Sgeffe Bronco looks with JLR “reliability!”What’s not to like?!
  • FreedMike Back in the '70s, the one thing keeping consumers from buying more Datsuns was styling - these guys were bringing over some of the ugliest product imaginable. Remember the F10? As hard as I try to blot that rolling aberration from my memory, it comes back. So the name change to Nissan made sense, and happened right as they started bringing over good-looking product (like the Maxima that will be featured in this series). They made a pretty clean break.
  • Flowerplough Liability - Autonomous vehicles must be programmed to make life-ending decisions, and who wants to risk that? Hit the moose or dive into the steep grassy ditch? Ram the sudden pile up that is occurring mere feet in front of the bumper or scan the oncoming lane and swing left? Ram the rogue machine that suddenly swung into my lane, head on, or hop up onto the sidewalk and maybe bump a pedestrian? With no driver involved, Ford/Volkswagen or GM or whomever will bear full responsibility and, in America, be ambulance-chaser sued into bankruptcy and extinction in well under a decade. Or maybe the yuge corporations will get special, good-faith, immunity laws, nation-wide? Yeah, that's the ticket.
  • FreedMike It's not that consumers wouldn't want this tech in theory - I think they would. Honestly, the idea of a car that can take over the truly tedious driving stuff that drives me bonkers - like sitting in traffic - appeals to me. But there's no way I'd put my property and my life in the hands of tech that's clearly not ready for prime time, and neither would the majority of other drivers. If they want this tech to sell, they need to get it right.