Tesla Suing The BBC over the very misleading Top Gear bias against the Roadster

Tesla Suing The BBC over the very misleading Top Gear bias against the Roadster

It is about time somebody took Clarkson et al to the cleaners regarding their stupid remarks and very biased program.

It beat the Elise hands down in a straight race and was even an early car from a very young Tesla.

searcher | 10 april 2011

morrispd, I think a new low in outright vulgarity has been reached in your messege to timo. Your anatomical suggestion for discussion is very odd, very odd indeed. We all know timo has very wide shooulders though. How wide are yours. Surely you don't won't to do a step by step comparison but bet he's got you beat so far.

the bonnie | 10 april 2011

Brand protection. Every company has the right to protect the reputation of their brand - and they take it very seriously. It's not whining when it translates into real dollars that impact a company's bottom line - it also translates into negative impact on stock price. It's not all about lost car sales.

Since I purchased my Roadster Sport, I've had a number of people tell me about the Top Gear episode (and clearly had taken it at face value). I even had someone send me the episode on DVD, thinking I needed to know about the problems. So the damage is real.

Top Gear has the right to film and say what they want. Tesla has the right to respond. If this was a frivolous suit, the courts would likely not be willing to hear it. Tesla has asked BBC & TG to quit propagating the misleading information and their requests have been ignored. If the TG episode had just gone away, I doubt there would be a suit. But it hasn't gone away.

If nothing else, Top Gear will be more careful in the future. Yes, it was entertainment, but it was mean-spirited entertainment. TG could have been just as entertaining by being factual. They chose not to be. So quit whining that 'it was just entertainment'.

(And honestly morrispd, you really need to put on your big-boy pants and act like an adult. That was so third grade.)

Tiebreaker | 10 april 2011

Umm... Looks like there are some TG shills here, working the "popular opinion" angle for the benefit of the defense in the lawsuit.

Alectric | 10 april 2011

For those thinking that top gear completely bagged out the Tesla, you obviously haven't watched the program much. Clarkson loved it in many factors, which is very rare for that grinch!!

@ timo:
1) So? If you are too far to get into nearest electric plug in limp mode you are majorly screwed, that just doesn't happen in real world unless you have IQ of a slug and ignore completely what your car is telling you.
- So i take it we just pull into someones drive way and ask for some power? And then sit around for a hour waiting to get some more charge? New technology will fix this, point is though, current tech is not so convenient/"doesn't seem to work".

Uphills are no problem to EV:s. You lose about 1kWh / 1000feet and regain around 60% of that back in downhill. (it's nearly directly the potential energy car gains, thanks to efficiency of the car).
- Shame my folks live 3500ft asl and i live at sea level... there is loads more uphill than down... that said running down will/should be very efficient.

However you probably won't like to drive quite that conservatively in your trip.
- correct, I wouldn't spend $100+k on a car to drive slowely thats for sure.

2) car didn't stop on track, which is what was shown. It was said that "engine is overheating" which was not true.
- what's your point? if any car overheats you do not "have" to stop, but its very wise to let the engine/motor cool down. Also, not even Tesla has claimed it did not overheat. They are claiming that it was not immobilised. Tesla are correct. Guess what, Top Gear never said it was either it "..reduced power.."

3) most people fixing cars do know what they are doing. Replacing a fuse is fast job, especially when car tells you that fuse is blown.
- i could go into how most people don't know how to fix stuff, its why we have mechanics and auto-electricians as professions. But the biggest issue you (actually, Tesla) have here is that the fuse was blown, ie broken. It needed replacing, if it wasn't broken it would not have needed replacing.

4) Both problems didn't happen at the same time. That was just a lie. Direct unquestionable lie.
- Find me the exact moment where Clarkson/Top Gear said that both problems did happen at same time. There could have been any number of issues arising, most obviously both could have been on charge given that they were on a track day. That said, how many people in the "real" world would have a 2nd car to swap when the other does slow/reduce power/need charge?

1).... Do they should them pushing other cars into the hanger to show what would have happened if they ran out of gas? I'm asking since I don't watch the show on a regular basis.
- They show lots of faults with other cars. They are somewhat biased to UK based companies in their "passion" for this though and say things like this brings "character" to the British cars (most people in this world are somewhat patriotic though). Having watched most top gear episodes the Tesla was treated very kindly for it's minor malfunctions.

It seems to me that they don't like EVs and were looking to portray them in the most negative light possible. Is this car expensive? Sure it is but that doesn't me it isn't a great car.
- They don't like "most" EV's for a good reason: Compared to driving most ICE cars they're crap. Watching the Tesla though they loved it in almost every way (quite odd for that trio), except when compared to the conveniences (refueling/price) we take for granted in modern ICE cars.

Timo | 10 april 2011

1) drive in gas station if you feel like it. EV "fuel gauge" is very accurate, up to exact mile you lose last of the charge. You get that warning a lot further away than those inaccurate ICE cars. You might even know just by entering GPS data about distance that you can't make it before you even take the trip.

3500 feet up is about 3.5 kWh. That's not much. About 6% of battery capacity.

2) TG didn't claim it was immobilized, but they show it as being immobilized with fabricated dying engine sound on background. It was not what they said, it was what they show.

3) I was reacting to your claim that it takes a long time for professional to fix the car. It doesn't. This "I've never met a mechanic that does things immdiately in the "real world""

I have got my car camber angle fixed in less than 10 minutes in local car repair shop. Guy did know what he was doing. Fix was so fast he didn't even charge me.

I guess you have had very bad luck with your local repair guys. Part of the Tesla service is "service rangers", they come to _you_ to fix the car. Replacing a fuse would have been fast job, though I have no idea how fast they get to you in real world.

4) Look the show. They show it in there just after "car dying". There was no downtime, both cars had at least 20% of charge left at any given time. This is confirmed by Tesla representative at the scene and car computers. It was just direct lie.

Real world people would not encounter that problem at all unless they do just that "track day". Roadster is a sport car, not race car. It is not build for racing.

Douglas3 | 11 april 2011

"there is loads more uphill than down"

Do you live in an Escher print?

Alectric | 11 april 2011

1) No doubt the guage is accurate, doesn't change it's range though. And you're right, if the Tesla was in my garage I would not be able to drive it to my folks' place, at least not on one charge. And I wouldn't even attempt it. We're back to ".. in the real world it doesn't seem to work"

Where does 1kWh/1000ft come from?

2) The source of that sound could be anything, including an amplified sound coming from the Tesla backing off (Top Gear often amplify sounds to allow viewers to hear otherwise unheard sounds that standard microphones would not deliver with other surrounding noise. watch the "VXR8 Bathurst" clip). Assuming it is 'dying" is up to you as the viewer. Until Top Gear give this sound source in court this point is moot anyway. As both of us, and Tesla (from what i've read), have no idea where this sound came from.

3) I would assume your mechanic doing a 10 minute fix job is either a friend or someone who is not busy. Typically most mechanics (at least the ones around here) will just put your car in line and you'll get it back sometime. That said I would change a fuse myself, assuming I knew it was a fuse...

4) this point (that both cars were over 20%) is stupid. Top Gear may have fabricated it for the show, but there was no deception. They could quite easily (given the consumption figures) have driven them both until the cars guages recommended charge well within the time taken to recharge fully, and left them with plenty of time to wait for them both to recharge again. To leave vital info like this out of the show (and giving us all the "peachy" stuff) would be lying. Irony?

qwk | 11 april 2011

Yikes, Top Gear shills is right.

If you run out of charge in an EV, you are an idiot. Same goes for running out of gas.

Common sense tells me that if a show is pre-scripted, you are not going to hear he truth.

When I see a car being pushed, that tells me the car cannot move under it's own power. End of story. If you push a car that moves under it's own power, it's either to lie, or you are an idiot.

If you think Shell sponsored TG likes Ev's, you are an idiot.

searcher | 11 april 2011

Alectric, Let's look at your statement {we are back to the "in the real world it doesn't seem to work"}. I would ask you to be reasonable now and let's calm down the inflamatory rhetoric. Now just go back and look over some post of Roadster owners who love their cars and these cars have logged millions{that's a lot,ha} of miles already. Think about one couple in Colorado who rode down the mountain to work and got a ton of regen while doing so, had enough regen to get almost back home so energy cost almost a freebie. And soo many other very satisfied owners. It has also been discussed in great detail in the posts that this is EV movement is in a very transitional mode. There needs to be and will be better batteries, nobody has reminded us of this more than timo. I know you are a very intelligent and resourseful person and to get to your folks home and back you could plan ahead and find you a place to recharge your battery and yourself at the same time. Actually would probably make for a much less tiring and safer trip as you would not be as fatigued going and coming back home. And when you got back home you just get back in the normal "ratrace" driving mode to work and back, to work and back, etc, etc. Now this is where your EV shines in "ratrace" mode which most of us are all somewhat in, like it or not, until we retire. Again the transitional aspect has been extensively discussed and we just basically learn to make adjustments as we are all basically pretty adaptable. We adapt until eventually the battery range will improve , the charging places will become less of hassle as there will be many more of them, and we will be highly informed where to find them. There will be cheaper versions of the cars where those not in the professional catagory can afford them an on and on. I remember my dad telling about when the Model T Ford was introduced they caused quite a disturbance as people would have to pull their horse drawn buggies, wagons, etc. over and try to keep the animals calmed down until the Model T was passed on by. So you see they, at this time, were in a great amount of transitional stress,shall we say, but they got through it and here we are today. So maybe best to say EV's "will work very well in the new real world". "Right now" in other words. So I would advise any attornies for TG to be careful not to defend such a staement as "they don't work in the real world" as this could be easily disproved and be described as a defamatory statement {not good in the purely legal sense,ha}.

Brian H | 11 april 2011

About mechanics: if you get smart or lucky ... in my younger days I had a Civic that kept blowing electrics (turn signals, indicator lights, etc.). Took it to my fave mechanic (Ken, Samson's Motors in Vanc. BC, still in business if you're local). He spent about 4 hours trying to track the problem, and failed. He replaced the battery fuse and charged me $1, refusing to be paid for a fix he hadn't completed.

Referred me to an auto electric specialty shop which said the car had been (secretly?) rebuilt in a previous life after a crash and they'd replaced the alternator (60A) with a Toyota version (90A).

I since then referred work to Ken worth '000s of dollars. Everyone raves about him.

Timo | 11 april 2011


1) For most people it does work. Not for everyone, just like two-seater is not enough to soccer-moms to pick up their kids, and SUV is too large to my taste. 1500+ Roadster owners would not agree with the sentiment "it does not work in real life".

1kWh/1000feet is nearly directly the potential energy car gains during ascent.


m=1235kg, g=9.81m/s^2, h=300m

U=3634605J = 1009.6125Wh

Real world figures are almost exactly same.

2) Sound was fabricated.

3) As I said your experience is different than mine (though I have got my share of bad service too, this was just an example of person who did know what he was doing)

4) Pushing car in garage when it still had charge left and never ever do that for ICE cars is no deception in your mind? That's odd. Of course they could have driven the car battery empty, but then the deception would have been in not showing how the car first warns then turns on limp mode and only after that dies.

Sudre | 11 april 2011

My only complaint about the "in the real world it doesn't seem to work" is what I think has been said here. They were not demonstrating the car in a real world situation. They were racing it around a test track. I do not know many people who commute on a test track except obviously, Alectric and the Stig. So I, as the viewer, would have to assume TG drove it around in the real world and concluded it didn't work since everyone drives over 300 miles a day up hill both ways in their real world.

I've been keeping track of how far I drive each day on my two cars (wifes and mine). I figure by the time I am ready to order I will have a good idea what size battery I will need. So far 57 miles is the furthest drive in one day. So far that would mean the Roadster would work in TG's real world... does that mean I am living in an imaginary world? hmmm....

I can replace fuses on my own. (TG indicates that's not in the real world)
I do not drive beyond the Roadsters mileage range with one of my ICE Cars. (TG indicates that's not in the real world)
I do not commute on a test track. (TG indicates that's not in the real world)
When my gas tank on my ICE car gets below 20% I keep driving it until I get to a gas station just like I would keep driving my electric car when it's below 20% charge until I get to a plug. (TG indicates that's not in the real world)
If I have to drive more than my electric car can go on it's charge I will simply drive my ICE car. (TG doesn't even realize that is an option!)

Cool I live in an imaginary world!

Alectric | 11 april 2011

1st of all (for those that think i'm a hater), I like EV's in theory and the Tesla is the best production example yet. I've followed EV's ever since I was part of a design team back at uni (b. elec eng) to design electric cars to be used on campus for security.

back to basic of the case though (we're gotten well away from the actual libel case here). It's actually going to be quite simple. Tesla's case are based on assumptions or simple failure of english.

If you want to work this out... argue these:
1) if a fuse needs replacing, said fuse is "broken", if said fuse is part of a system then by association the system is "broken" until said fuse is replaced/fixed. - for timo et al, it doesn't matter how/who fixes it, it doesn't change the fact it's broken.

2) lots of people here (including Tesla) think you can drive the car with no charge - although given some gravity you'll get 60% (timo's info) of the way back up the hill.

3) definition of "seem":
–verb (used without object)
to appear to be, feel, do, etc.
Therefore this is subjective and up to whoever is watching it. If you want to take this as gospel, especially from Top Gear, then you need your head read.

4) much discusion here has been about consumption. And we'd all agree that it depends solely on your situation. Some of us could get over 300+ miles, Tesla recommend 211miles, and on a track it could be as low as 55miles. Therefore Top Gears statement on consumption is perfectly legally allowable. They did not say/imply that the rest of us would use the same consumption as they did on their track.

5) the sound could have come from anywhere, and as we do not have Top Gear's production records none of us can tell where this sound came from, fabricated, amplified or otherwise.

Any other claims are subject to assumptions and bias. If you like taking the negative in everything, then you will. While on the day of filming the claims may have been fabricated and being considered a lie. No one that could can argue that said claims are not possible, which is what I'm being led to believe here.

EV's are definately still progressing and much of what you say is true, but it's not the point. What's sad is that we had EV's before ICE cars (the 1st EV came out around 1890ish). EV's then got put on the back peddle as there was not the technology to back them up, sadly.

@ Timo: thank you for those figures. It means I would have to work out the total elevation gained (ie every hill i go up), of which i don't have. Then add in the fact that i'll gain 60% return for any down hill. Given that it's all hills, i know it's going to be a lot more than 3500ft.

@ sudre: funny you mention that I commute on a racetrack. That route to my folks is awesome to drive, very little traffic, fewer cops, and lots of corners (sadly not my standard commute :P) It also had a council sign on it "motorcyclist's, this is not Eastern Creek, please take it easy", (at least until it was stolen). (for reference

Timo | 12 april 2011

I only comment on your point 2. What makes you believe that we believe that car can be driven without charge?

About energy regain, it isn't quite that simple, that 60% comes from the fact that Roadster drivetrain is about 80% efficient overall, so same thing run other direction you should get 80% back too, but engine isn't quite as efficient as generator, so 60% is kind of "safe bet".

OTOH, if you think battery usage, you gain everything extra you lost in uphill going back downhill (that energy has to go somewhere) as long as you don't need to go to regenerative braking. This translates to pretty much same as if you were driving in flat plane as long as downhills are not very steep (and you end up where you started).

Alectric | 12 april 2011

What makes you believe that we believe that car can be driven without charge?
- because no one here can comprehend that the Tesla could run out of charge. If Tesla et al could comprehend this, then there would be no complaint about "pushing a car into a shed"

The equations you gave me were what i had kinda expected, lacking exact losses through heat and "drivetrain" that you since mentioned.

You will not gain everything lost on the way up when you go back down due to other losses (read: inefficienies). Things like heat loss, tire resistance downhill be different than up hill etc. They would all be quite small, but measurable especially when put together.

Vawlkus | 12 april 2011

Alectric: no, you're not reading what we're typing.

Neither car loaned to TG was out of charge.

This is a documented fact.

If a car has charge left in it's battery, it is still capable of being driven. If a car is still capable of being driven, then the only viable explanation for PUSHING that car is to give the FALSE impression that the car is NOT capable of being driven.

THIS is what Tesla is pursuing with it's lawsuit, false impressions given about it's product, and Tesla is well within it's rights to do so.

Sudre | 12 april 2011

All us Tesla fans should just place Alectric on the ignore list, if there was one. The simpleton is not here to discuss, just babble. Alectric hasn't even read the case. Alectric still thinks both vehicles were out of charge. There is no way to have a discussion with people who want to make up facts.

I'm not interested in discussing the definition of broken. Different people define it different ways. Broken means not working, to me, or physically separated to cause said item to no longer work. Since the brakes were still working they were not broke. I would have use a different word. Either way I don't think they have much of a case on the "broken" portion of the case.

The rest is fair game since the car works just fine in the real world.

dsm363 | 12 april 2011

I assume Alectric doesn't own a Roadster (if you do, correct me) but we are aware EVs can run out of power just as people know ICEs can run out of gas. What kind of argument is that? I actually never even look at my remaining range during a normal day because I drove at most 40-50 miles in a day.

No one is saying everything Top Gear said couldn't happen:
Of course it's possible for the Roadster to run out of power

That's not what happened 'in the real world' though. Neither one of the Roadsters ran out of power, they just pushed it into the hanger to give the false impression that the Roadster suddenly lost power and they were stuck. Very misleading but I guess you don't see that so there's really no point in continuing this I would think.

Timo | 12 april 2011

@Aelectric You will not gain everything lost on the way up when you go back down due to other losses (read: inefficienies). Things like heat loss, tire resistance downhill be different than up hill etc. They would all be quite small, but measurable especially when put together.

You do get it all back as long as you don't need to run engine as generator. Like you said it is all about losses, and drivetrain, aerodynamic, ancillary and rolling resistance losses stay pretty much same uphill and downhill as long as you still use engine to move forward. Potential energy gain of the car then is either added directly to those going up or subtracted going down. Uphill/downhill effect is very close to zero net result, differences come from drivetrain efficiency differences when accelerating harder to overcome uphill and accelerating less going downhill.

In this particular case you might actually gain *more* downhill than you lose going up (it's delta loss, not overall loss).

searcher | 13 april 2011

Kevin Sharpe, Are their any competitor companies to the BBC in th UK. If so who are they and where located,Scotland, Wales, or where ever?

searcher | 13 april 2011

Actually with the right media management seems that this could be turned into a bit of positive publicity for both BBC of course the flap is out there now. BBC realizing that world attention was high and very inflamed could then istead of apologizing just announce to the world that they had so much irrate criticism from Tesla fans they decided to review their program and did discover errors, correct these errors on air, then do a whole show on satisfied Roadster owners. Of course let there be some media build up to this show such as "Lets Review it Again" "OOPS!" or something of that nature and let BBC be presented as being very careful about their reviews, very anaylitical, and notally unbiased when making presentations, correct the mistakes on air and come out looking like a very discriminating and unbiased company. Then do another show entirely on satisfied Roadster owners to further show their objective reviewing. How about it BBC and Tesla, think this could be a doable.

Alectric | 13 april 2011

@Vawlkus (and dsm363):
i'm reading yours fine, but you don't seem to be understanding me (or Top Gear). I've never disputed that the cars did not run out of charge (as claimed in the libel case). However, claim notes, page 4: (paraphrased to shorten)
- "IF it does run out it's not a quick job to charge it up again"
- {car gets pushed into hanger}
- information (not disputed) about charge times.
it's clearly stated "IF"... where here does it say it did run out of charge? IF this part had have been separated from the prior scene I'm guessing people would have been able to differentiate it easier, and it would not be in the case.

What I did try to portray was (and how I always took that particular scene) what happens IF the Tesla did run out of energy. Every time i raised this "what if it did?", I got shot down saying that it couldn't happen cause you would have to be an idiot and not read guages... which is a different point altogether.

@Sudre: lol thanks. I happen to be a fan of both Tesla and Top Gear, so I'm taking this quite seriously and rationally from both sides. Guess you're just blinded by rose (Tesla) coloured glasses and nothing will allow you comprehend opposing opinions. If you're wondering what I see (but i'd doubt it), it's both sides. Yes Tesla have some credible issues (the fabricated sound especially, but it's unproven yet), but they're based on assumptions of viewers and therefore I think the case is weak.

no i don't have a Tesla, in Aus they cost a rediculous amount (around $200k, US or AU seeing as their close to parity) and is out of my market.

I think we're on the same line here. Kinetic equations (PE=KE crap) have to hold, but unfortunately that's a perfect world. Add in losses in the AC machine (which are more generating vs motor) along with external losses and we're not going to gain as much going down as we will up. To work out the equations for this require me to remember a whole heap of shit I hated at uni, and the exact parameters AC machine in the Tesla. (Either way, i doubt this will come up in court :P)

yeah it will hopefully be positive both ways. Tesla are always improving their systems and I sincerely hope they allow Top Gear to test new versions, although somehow I doubt it. I'm guessing the case will also bring out that Top Gear has always been based on opinions, rarely factual and obviously not a typical magazine style show (like 5th Gear).

Top Gear has not been factual since they recreated the show in 2001/2. Sadly not everyone watches it as much as others and often mistake this. Nearly every car test will attest to this, especially any of Clarkson's. This is nothing new, it's been well documented for years. If you doubt this, google "clarkson vectra"

msiano17 | 13 april 2011

Every one needs to take a step back and relax. Here is the thing about law suits... emotions and personal opinions never play into the judgement of its outcome.. period.

The fact of this whole thing is that TG did indeed cause slander towards Tesla. I know for a fact that some people are going to argue and so be it.... its to late to argue, I will prove you wrong next time.

Alectric | 14 april 2011

true msiano, our opinions matter little. Unless you're a lawyer who's specialty is in Libel law. I believe (yes it's my opinion) that TM won't win this, but I firmly believe (and to bring back what someone said earlier) that it was never the case.

Regardless of how the libel claim (and this thread) turns out, it was never the point. This arvo I ventured out a little more than usual blogs/review sites I frequent... and low and behold every motoring blog/website/forum has something about this lawsuit. Now I didn't believe for a second that it was confined to my certain sites. But it's not just car sites that have picked up the ball. TM's brand awareness just went through the roof world wide (and if played properly in a positive way). Bravo TM, well played. I like it. May I suggest next time adding an "i" to the front of the name of the next car and get Apple involved.

Vawlkus | 14 april 2011

I still believe this BBCs attempt to get back at Tesla for showing them up from their biased little story (check the blogs for the details on that one).

So Alectric, how often do you push a car that has a full tank of gas? Must be quite frequent.
Oh, and how are your black glasses from TG working out? Run into any other lampposts recently?

the bonnie | 14 april 2011
Tiebreaker | 14 april 2011


I think TG didn't play out enough "what if" scenarios. I.e. they should show:

- What if a thief steals the Roadster battery...
- What if a stone punctures the oil pan and all the oil leaks out
- What if a 17th century cannon fires a cannonball at the Roadster from close proximity
- What if an elephant sits on the Roadster's hood
- What if a swarm of killer bees attack the driver, with the top down
- What if an alien flying saucer lands on top of the Roadster
- What if zombies... aah...

Quite possible this may happen one day, so why not inform the public, in an entertaining way?

Alectric | 14 april 2011

I was all into that article until... "when it looks a lot to me like a specialist and expert automotive programme with a high degree of technical knowhow and influence". Then it lost all credit, anyone who takes Top Gear with a "high degree of..." must also think Fox News and Colbert are bona fide too.

@Tiebreaker: (and others, remembering TG is serious business)
Done, except I replaced the Tesla with a Fiesta.

There are countless other reviews they've done like this. Why did they not do the Tesla this way? Who knows...

the bonnie | 14 april 2011

Fox "News" has all the trappings of a legit news show & also does a lot of harm as a result. You make the point.

msiano17 | 14 april 2011


If you are a lawyer, you must be the worst one at your firm. Did I state that your opinion did not matter? No. But I did state that personal opinions and emotions do not belong in a suit of this sort. Tesla allowed permission for TG to test their car out for some publicity not for some slander, and they received slander.

Maybe you do not think the suit will hold up, maybe you are a lawyer who knows a bit about it more than some, but all you are here is a blogger and not a part of the legal team on either side of the table. There is TM's side, there is TG's side, and somewhere in the middle there is the truth of the matter. But I know for a fact that I was caught of guard myself after seeing the episode and brought up to the employee at the Chicago location when I reserved my S. So Tesla's point that it has impacted people by making misleading claims about their car is true. TG did lead one to believe the Roadster only could do 55 miles, far from the truth.

Timo | 14 april 2011

"There are countless other reviews they've done like this. Why did they not do the Tesla this way? Who knows..."

Because then it would have been obvious as a joke, of course. They don't like EV:s so they deliberately try to trash their reputation. Not the first time:

Tiebreaker | 15 april 2011


It is obvious. The episode is done with a tongue in cheek, and it is obvious, and announced. And yet doesn't slander the little car: nobody is pushing it, it is not shown standing still in the shopping mall because "it might have run out of fuel"... On the contrary...

And in your comment above that the article lost credit, you are missing the point that TG does have a lot of influence.

Anyway, you are just another TG shill here, laying the groundwork for their defense. This will be a new legal term: "The clown defense, AKA the TG defense"

neroden | 25 april 2011

Brian, stop repeating right-wing propaganda and read Many plants are gonna love the CO2. So are reptiles! Like the reptiles, many insects will enjoy the Cretaceous climate!

Us mammals, and the food crops we eat, and the portion of the ocean food chain we depend upon, not so much. Global warming, which is CO2 induced (that's just a proven fact at this point), is just not good for *humans*, because we and our food chain are adapted to a low-CO2 environment.

Lying is just not acceptable. To get back on topic, Top Gear actually has a fairly substantial record of setting up shows with pre-scripted results and staging their "races" to favor whatever result Clarkson wants to get. The show is famously biased, particularly if you look at any of the "train vs. car" episodes.

This about sums it up: "When you next time look at the show don't believe anything they say. Nothing in that show is real." Unfortunately they pretend that it's real. Clarkson is a disgrace to the BBC.

Now, Tesla would not win such a libel lawsuit in the US, which has very strong First Amendment protections even for blatant falsehoods. But this is the UK. Look up "UK libel laws", and you'll see that Tesla is almost guaranteed to win -- its case is much stronger than the average successful UK libel case.

Brian H | 26 april 2011

RealClimate was set up as a promo and propaganda site by the Hokey Team from the get-go. It totally blocks any actual discussion of the science, merely repeats the Party Line ad nauseum. It doesn't speak well of your judgment that you actually recommend it!

Blood_Star715 | 9 mei 2011

Heres something else Tesla might want to look in to. This Nissan commercial said this exactly "There is also the nissan leaf, THE ONLY KNOWN VEHICLE THAT ONLY RUNS ON ELECTRICITY". Can we not say that Tesla could have a case here?

Timo | 9 mei 2011

Yes they would have case there. In my country that is false advertising, which is crime. Also Mitsubishi with MiEV, Citroen with whatwasitsname and BMW with MiniEV could sue Nissan for that.

David70 | 9 mei 2011

Not to mention that there are a number of small companies that have ranges of 40 miles or less that have been around several years. Now, those use lead acid batteries, but they're still purely electric.

They could fairly say the Leaf is the only purely electric vehicle that runs more than 80 miles, but less than 120 miles.

Nissan just has to be careful with its qualifiers.

Timo | 9 mei 2011

Blueberries message is spam, copy&paste from earlier comment. Can someone send an ICBM to that target?

searcher | 12 mei 2011

Hey did anyone notice when Prince William took his new bride for a spin it was in his dad's car that had been converted to run on winery by products or something of this nature. Forgot the name of the british poster who was trying to alert everyone to bias in BBC reporting. Still think it would be good if someone there could get in touch with their MP and get the Royals interested in Tesla. Think they would love the concept as they are somewhat in the same boat with most or the rest of the world when it comes to energy for autos.

searcher | 12 mei 2011

Think the Royals might be able to afford a fleet of Tesla's too. Not bad publicity at all.

searcher | 12 mei 2011

@Kevin Sharpe {poster made reference to above}. Hey Kevin what's been going on in your world. Check out last few posts here. What do you think?

searcher | 13 mei 2011

As I really like Tesla Motors and the BBC I sincerely hope a win win can develop from this situation as I believe it can.

I think I have a great idea to pitch to BBC. Nothng to do with the Tesla situation of course.

As somebody has said public notice in the positive can result in a plus for both companies. I have alluded to a rough outline of this in a post of quite a while ago.

Really wish the british would lift the ban on Martha Stewart and Michael Savage from entering their country to.

The BBC has produced some really great programming, rememebering all the great Masterpiece Theatre stuff here. Hope both them and Tesla can work out something and both come out looking swell. The BBC could just report on the uproar by all us Tesla fans and just say "Let's just take another look here" and just go and visually document several of the satisfied owners I have seen just on this site and conclude "Well maybe we "jumped the gun" a bit old gang and it seems this Tesla is a wonderful car." Think how gracious and confident this would make the BBC look. As confident people and confident companies are not afraid to admit they misjudged. Think how many politicians and others would have had less complicated times if they had taken this gracious and confident tact.

Vawlkus | 13 mei 2011

Check the blogs searcher. I doubt BBC has forgiven Tesla for loaning a Roadster to someone who used that car to upstage their "test run of an electric car on a long trip", where the Roadster took one day to do what BBC took 4 days to do, in a car that was never intended to be on the market (a prototype).

searcher | 13 mei 2011

@Vawlkus, Thanks for refreshing my memory. Is this the case where the guy made the one day run to Edinborough or somewhere in Scotland. Was this aired on BBC? If BBC is in unforgiving mode then this is a very counterproductive place for them to be as they should get on board and "ride the wave" to the great advantage of both companies. Perhaps corporate ego's may not be thinking bottom line in this situation. Hopefully they will get over it and come around. Again, I have an unanswered question, are their any big competing media companies in the UK and Europe in general. Know Murdock is an Aussie as is Musk so maybe Tesla could get some good coverage through Murdock. Know the big German media outlet Deutchevilla{sp}. That is big news about the German battery company with the hopefully game changing battery.

Brian H | 15 mei 2011

searcher, BBC is in slander phase. And Musk is South African, then Canadian, then American. No Oz in 'im.

searcher | 15 mei 2011

Commend you on your command of knowledge about Elon Musk. As I mentioned in another post sometimes when the "little guy" calls the "big guy" in very humble, congenial, manner, wonder if that might possibly change "slander" phase to "concillatory" phase?

Case is we have got a relatively small company in USA trying to break new ground for a technology that will benefit the entire planet. We actually would appreciate their help and coporation, don't want a big public argument but a big public mutually beneficial coorperation.

Just polite, congenial, truth to power dialog here. Hope this would change the whole picture, as after all the BBC does swing a pretty big bat here. Lets be realistic.

Of course Tesla the giant killer is a tact to. So it remains to be seen which tact is best.

searcher | 15 mei 2011

Of course "little guy" referring to above would not be any of Tesla management because wouldn't put them in "little guy" catergory. Maybe just an everyday Tesla enthusiast like the engineer{name escapes me} from Arizona who was very profesional and congenial who had waited a long time to get his electric car.

If I called probably start "Revoluntionary War" all over again.

Brian H | 16 mei 2011

GrammarNasty Mode ON/ it's "tack" (as in sailing), not "tact" (as in persuading). /GM Mode OFF

For some reason it's ideological for the BBC. Once they decide to program the populace, there's no deflecting them.

Brian H | 16 mei 2011

Oops, typo: that should be "GN Mode OFF", not "GM". Late nite brain lag is to blame.

VolkerP | 16 mei 2011

so /GM Mode is when you act as a spokes person for General Motors?