Opinion: The Washington Post Catches Up to the Perils of Self-Driving

Tim Healey
by Tim Healey

As much as I am a news junkie, I do try to disconnect a bit on weekends. Yet, this past Sunday, I had an hour to kill and a smartphone by my side, so I perused the headlines of our major newspapers.

I needed a break from the endless discussion about the Supreme Court’s latest decision — fear not, dear reader, as I will save my thoughts on that for a more appropriate outlet — and I saw that The Washington Post’s editorial board had weighed in on the problems with autonomous driving.

Here’s the headline, for those too lazy to click through: “The problem with self-driving cars? Many don’t drive themselves.”

And the lede paragraph: “The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released a report this month on crashes involving vehicles with automated technology. Self-driving cars may not really be the problem — the problem is cars that don’t drive themselves but manage to convince the drivers that they do.”

Here, The Post dives into a National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) report about crashes involving autonomous driving.

The op-ed points out two things that most automotive journalists have been figuratively screaming from the rooftops for half a decade (or more) now. One — automated-driving systems have flaws. Two — drivers sometimes rely too much on partial autonomous systems. I also appreciate the article calling out Tesla, however mildly, for its misleading use of the term “Autopilot”.

It concludes with a reminder that even if NHTSA comes up with regulations to improve the tech, that it’s up to drivers to remember that ultimately they need to be the ones in control.

Thank you, WaPo.

I’m heartened that one of the nation’s Big Four (New York Times, Washington Post, Wall St. Journal, USA Today) newspapers gave a part of its opinion page — and the weight of its editorial board, for whatever that’s worth* — to a topic that’s near and dear to the heart of automotive enthusiasts and industry observers but also affects nearly everyone. But I am also dismayed — the general/mainstream press should’ve probably tackled this subject sooner.

*That value is probably determined by each individual reader, since some of us give more weight to editorial boards than others, and even that can vary by outlet.

It’s understandable to an extent — automotive sections have been decimated at most newspapers, thanks to a variety of factors, most of which pertain to the shaky (and sometimes, insanely stupid) economics of the media business. Once upon a time, your local paper would have an auto critic who’d write a review each week and maybe a couple news/feature stories — a critic who could inform his/her readers about this topic. At the very least, a wire service story might be picked up.

Now, though, the mainstream media always seems a step slow when it comes to following developments in the automotive industry, unless they make news for the business section — or unless Elon Musk has done something attention-grabbing again.

To be fair, it may not be all bad — I do see plenty of news coverage on this topic in major outlets like WaPo, at least anecdotally. And it’s always possible there have been similar op-eds I’ve missed — I don’t have the time to read every article produced on the subject. That said, it’s nice to see people with an influential platform reminding the public that no matter what type of autonomous-driving tech or advanced-driving aids (ADAS) their car has, they need to pay attention and drive.

TTAC has reach, but we don’t have WaPo reach.

I am no Luddite. I am not, in principle, necessarily opposed to autonomous driving or ADAS features. But I do believe that true autonomous driving — ie, Level 5 — is a long way off. I also believe that even in today’s cars, which are full of things like automated emergency braking systems and blind-spot monitoring warnings, the driver is ultimately in control. Autonomous tech and ADAS can be helpful in the right circumstances, but the driver must, ultimately, drive.

So it’s good to see a major media outlet put the message out there.

I am less optimistic that the public will get the message. Just yesterday, I passed a driver on the Eisenhower Expressway who was driving too slow and weaving. I thought he might be drunk, and while that’s certainly possible, I could see he was paying more attention to his phone than his task as I maneuvered around him.

If we can’t get drivers to stop texting, it’s going to be an uphill battle to get them to not be overly reliant on forward-collision warning.

But the more that media outlets with giant platforms push the message of responsibility, the better.

[Image: Nicole Glass Photography/Shutterstock.com]

Tim Healey
Tim Healey

Tim Healey grew up around the auto-parts business and has always had a love for cars — his parents joke his first word was “‘Vette”. Despite this, he wanted to pursue a career in sports writing but he ended up falling semi-accidentally into the automotive-journalism industry, first at Consumer Guide Automotive and later at Web2Carz.com. He also worked as an industry analyst at Mintel Group and freelanced for About.com, CarFax, Vehix.com, High Gear Media, Torque News, FutureCar.com, Cars.com, among others, and of course Vertical Scope sites such as AutoGuide.com, Off-Road.com, and HybridCars.com. He’s an urbanite and as such, doesn’t need a daily driver, but if he had one, it would be compact, sporty, and have a manual transmission.

More by Tim Healey

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 11 comments
  • C5 is Alive C5 is Alive on Jun 28, 2022

    So-called "self-driving" vehicles should absolutely be called out, but I still find it curious that TTAC doesn't mention, at least in passing, the inherently loaded nature of a Bezos-owned media outlet sniping at technology best known for its use in vehicles manufactured by Musk-owned Tesla. (Alas, you're probably giving yourself far too much credit on any "reach" TTAC has, too.)

    • La834 La834 on Jun 28, 2022

      Bezos may own the Washington Post, but as a regular reader I can assure you that he doesn't have any direct sway on their reporting. Any time they mention Bezos or Amazon in an article, they always note that Bezos owns WaPo. They're still often critical of things Amazon, and occasionally Bezos himself, does.

  • Stuki Stuki on Jun 28, 2022

    "It concludes with a reminder that even if NHTSA comes up with regulations to improve the tech, " Since clueless bureaucrats "coming up" with things orders of magnitude above their nonexistent brain grade, is how technology is improved. and all.......

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
  • Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Next