Earlier today – or, crap, now that I look at the time, yesterday – we ran a post about the design of the Rivian R3X. It was a rant, really, and while the post had plenty of interesting arguments and some very satisfyingly cathartic ranting, it also contained some actual insults and a tone that I should have realized is not in keeping with what we want the Autopian to be about. I hope you’ll let me apologize and explain how we wish to move forward.
The post was from our design expert Adrian Clarke, and I adore Adrian. He’s an absolute sweetheart and a very talented designer. He also has a sort of designer persona that is expressed in articles he writes for us, and I find it to be generally cutting and funny and insightful. And while this post absolutely had those elements, I think there were definitely places where the powerful currents of a cathartic rant pulled him too far, and as I was the one to edit this post, I should have perceived that and made appropriate changes.
Sadly, I didn’t. Sure, I added a few editor’s notes here and there, but I made the mistake of assuming my knowledge of an author’s tone and intent would carry through, as if by magic, to every reader, and that was certainly not the case. There were parts that were frankly insulting, and there’s no excuse for that. We’re not here to insult anyone. Ever.
We can have strong opinions, unpopular takes, but we can’t just attack people because we’re caught up in the callow pleasure of a rant. We’re not here to gatekeep; while we value expert opinions – and I definitely consider Adrian a qualified expert – we don’t ever want those experts to make others feel like their opinions aren’t welcome. We can disagree, absolutely, but we will never discount anyone’s right to voice how they feel about anything automotive.
We’re all here for one reason: we love cars. That love can take many, many forms, and one of those forms is definitely spirited, vigorous debate. But it should never even appear like there’s a lack of respect from our side to yours; you readers mean everything to us. You’ve been loyal, you’ve hung out with us at meetups, and you’ve even supported us by becoming members. We owe you our very best efforts, and only our very best. And this wasn’t that.
Everyone is welcome here at The Autopian, no matter how miserable I or any of our writers may feel your opinion on some car or whatever is. Or how miserable you feel my opinions are. It just doesn’t matter. If you’re at the Autopian, you will be treated with respect and dignity. Sure, there may be some teasing or joking or poking, but within boundaries.
And this time, those boundaries were crossed, and I don’t intend to see that repeated.
So please accept my apologies here; this is on me, I should have perceived the magnitude and intensity of the words we published and their full implications, and I didn’t. I’ll do my best to try and improve, to repaint those lines we won’t cross in a more vivid hue, so I don’t allow them to be stepped over again. I’ll likely make plenty more mistakes in the future, but I hope this will no longer be one of them.
I sincerely hope you’ll forgive my failings here, and I look forward to the chance to fuck up in bold, new, and more exciting ways in the future. All of us at the Autopian appreciate you so very much, and I deeply hope you’ll chose to continue to explore the grand, absurd, complex, and beautiful automotive world with us.
As repentance, I offer you a sketch of an alternate universe Fiat 500 where Italy achieved energy independence via the development of powerful pasto-anti-pasto reactor systems, which harnesses the incredible energy released when these two oppositely-charged foodstuffs react in a controlled environment:
I like a little venom every now and then. I didn’t feel attacked even when I “poked the bear” with my comments. In fact, his response to me annoying the hell out of him made him my bestest buddy to comment with from now on.
I wasn’t offended by Adrian’s article, it was quite entertaining to me. I take everyone’s pieces on this site as coming from a place of knowledge far greater than I know. I try to learn a bit here and there, like engineering from David, mobile living from Mercedes, design from Adrian, and use of fancy words from Jason. That being said, I still think the R3 looks like an 80s hatchback in the way that Hyundai N Vision 74 looks like an 80s sport coupe lol
I don’t recall there being any issue with that article… it was just regular Adrian.
“We’re not here to insult anyone. Ever.”
Oh c’mon… we have to have some exceptions… like for MAGA assholes, right?
And NAMBLA members… we’re gonna insult them when needed, no?
And the Convoy assholes we had up here in Canada… that crowd deserves ALL the insults.
Oh, how I wished I could’ve read the original article. I enjoy the irreverence of this site and go to great lengths to never be offended by something I read on the internet. That being said, it would appear someone was offended (shame on you, you doofus), and I respect the fact that you owned up to it publicly.
You’ll never have to apologize to me, unless you publish my full name and picture with a caption that my father smelt of elderberries.
British humour is different, y’all.
Might try going back to the original one with the “wayback machine” lol
I met your father and he had a definite fruity whiff about him…
Well, he’s a winemaker*, so….
*not really
Taking preorders on the first batch of “Free Adrian” t-shirts, black on black, naturally.
In all seriousness, I appreciate the transparency and desire to keep the site civil. I do think a note at the beginning of the original piece explaining the edits (with the same sentiment, even) would have been more appropriate approach than a stand-alone piece. This well-meaning attempt to fall on your sword has perhaps made this more of an issue than it needed to be, implies things that were not intended, and probably took up much more editorial bandwidth than it needed to.
I assume this is being backtracked because of advertisers. I thoroughly enjoyed the original article and anything Adrian so if anything I’m insulted at the thought it needed censoring.
Nope. I amended the story after I saw that it included personal attacks, what could be interpreted as a threat of violence, and ridicule of someone’s appearance. We do not stand for that here.
There is nothing more to it. (I’ll reiterate that this was an editing failure, and not on AC).
Yikes. I’m starting to think I may have read the sanitized version
Eh, dunno, not everything is about kowtowing to the advertisers. This seemed more a case of simply doing the right thing, so to speak.
ETA: I see that DT replied (such that it indeed confirms the above about not kowtowing to the advertisers) so kudos to DT (& JT) for such editorial actions.
Maybe a smidge too much Charlie Brooker in the mix.
I will join whatever Autopian membership level provides for a weekend bender with Dirty Uncle Adrian.
they’re going to have to add “Alcantara” level
Only if it’s quilted Alcantara – Then I’m in.
s a m e
Adrian’s a designer. Most of the people I went to school with were the same way as well as me (though for about the first time in my life, somehow less so). The insulting language is kind of like how comedians go at each other where it might sound terrible to someone who isn’t accustomed, but it is the language of those people. I’m half Greek and I also happened to grow up with several people on the psycho-narc spectrum, so there was a certain type of angry interaction that I was used to (there’s a long thing I could write pondering the relationship between the draw—pun intended—of control through design and those with dysfunctional backgrounds). My favorite boss was a hilarious Italian who also fit the fiery Mediterranean stereotype. Every once in a while, we’d blow up at each other over . . . well, it didn’t really matter, but it would freak out any normals who happened through the lab who apparently grew up in one of those functional families I’ve heard about (I don’t believe they exist). Five minutes later, one of us would tell a joke and that was the end of it while I think the normals were still hiding under their desks in the office area next door. To me, they were a bunch of wusses, but over time I’ve come to realize that isn’t necessarily true, they were just used to an environment where people had different standards of behavior and, who knows, maybe one even more insidiously, secretively dysfunctional). I guess my point is that for some people, the line between venting rants full of creative insults that even the recipient can appreciate and true meanspiritedness can be pretty fine and certainly easy to mistake the former for the latter by people who aren’t familiar with that arguably dysfunctional way of interacting. I think we could all use a little better understanding of the different ways people may be used to communicating. Certainly I’ve been misinterpreted over the years (that went both ways—sometimes I was insulting someone and they’d think it was playing) by going a little too far just as some people are a little too quick to take offense. Like the saying: actions speak louder than words, I also think it’s important to look more at intent than the words.
So is Uncle Adrian on double secret probation now?
I read the edited and original versions. Re-editing it was the right thing to do. This site is one of the more civil places on the internet, so I appreciate the acknowledgement that this crossed the line.
To me, the tone and insults kept me from learning anything by reading it (I read it and only recall the insults, some of which were admittedly amusing). I may be biased since I am less interested in whether a car is designed well in an academic sense, but I read Adrian’s posts and almost always learn something and gain a better appreciation for the vehicle discussed. Unfortunately, this post was written in a way that made it substantially less interesting and informative.
Having read both versions, I can understand why the editorial staff felt the need to tone it down a bit, but I’m wondering if it would have been better to label the original as “scorching hot opinion piece” with a big editorial explainer. I saw this apology article first, so I was imagining something deeply awful had happened. The original was enjoyable – Adrian is one whose writing style is so distinct that I don’t have to look at the byline, and and I’m happy to have added “shit-witted winkle tickler” to my range of insults.
Honestly, I feel like his rant was quite mild. But then I come from a background where you don’t try to do something that you don’t know anything about. Of course, in my life and lines of work, ignorance kills. And people like those social media types dump all over hard working people like me, so my response is generally much more aggressive than Uncle Goth could ever be.
I enjoy all the writers here. Each is unique in their own way and I look forward to reading the content produced by each. Adrian’s take was no worse than I’ve read elsewhere, and in many ways more informed.
That was it?! I tracked down the original and I was expecting denunciations on the order of Khruschev’s Secret Speech. This is a one-pepper burrito. All the moreso because it’s clearly aimed at people who present themselves as experts.
Adrian is just a terminal case of missing the forest for the trees. People are happy that there’s a new car on the market that reminds them of a different car that made them feel things! He probably gets mad when someone compares his favourite medieval author to Chaucer instead of Thomas Malory.
Besides which any illusions of being ‘another Golf’ will be dispelled by the, uh, extra 2,000 pounds of pork on the R3X.
Just put the word “Rant” in the title if you feel like it needs it. I read that as a passion piece, and I’m all for that whether I agree or not. I have a lot of passion for cars, and if I’m reading someone else’s words about them, I find it elating to see that same passion. That’s what I’m looking for, and I found it. Car articles should be Zondas, not Aleros
COTD: “Car articles should be Zondas, not Aleros”
OK, but “shit-witted winkle ticklers” is my new band name.
Good news… swwt.com is available!
Shwinklers for short.
That’s what our fan club is called. Taylor has her Swifties. We get Shwinklers.
There is an old adage in baseball that when you argue with an umpire there is one word you can’t say to them and that word is “you.” Telling an ump “That was a shitty call” won’t win you many arguments or friends but you can probably get away with it. Telling them “You are a shitty ump” is going to get you run immediately.
That’s not the word you couldn’t say to an ump in Bull Durham….
I originally made reference to that and decided to remove it for brevity!
That was a shit-witted winkle tickler call.
(kidding)
the best sports movie of all time
I’ll add another vote to the “I enjoy pissy Adrian” camp. I think yesterday’s rant maybe went a little past the line in the degree to which he took shots at specific people (there’s the comedic (& journalistic) maxim of punching up, not down), but it’s a matter of degrees, not kind. I _want_ snarky Adrian, and I am absolutely fine being told I’m a clown who wouldn’t know good design if it fucked my dead grandmother (because it’s true). I’ve learned a lot about design from his articles.
(On that note, I’d love a proper “Car Designer teaches Design” series, too – I think the individual design critiques are great, but something closer to “how to read a design” would be rad.)
Seconded on that thought of how to read a design. Some of that gets touched on in the design critiques, but a more generalized version of that idea would be great!
I liked the article; it was passionate and visceral, but I can see you not wanting direct hits at other content creators here.
I do not agree with the notion that original article needed to be edited. I went to the wayback machine to read what could have possibly been so offensive that the article had to be censored and modified. What did I find? Some PG-13 grade insults and a reference to two people specifically.
This whole affair seems entirely unnecessary. The original premise of the article is that the internet commentariat at large is so hungry for clicks, they’ll say any number of pointless and uninformed things to get them. Evidence was provided of this and the offenders were called out. This was not punching down.
This, to me, falls into the paradox of tolerance. That is, we are of this mind that everyone’s opinion is valid so we should listen to everyone–even when they are uninformed, ignorant or just attention seekers. I do not believe that everyone is entitled to equal weight of their opinions; this is why we have subject matter experts like Adrian who DO know what they’re talking about.
I find this whole approach distasteful. It shows a lack of courage on behalf of the editor and management. It demonstrates a lack of support for a talented employee. This could have been little more than someone editing the page and making a brief note that there were some adjustments made. Instead we have a VERY public shaming of one of the best writers on the site. I’ve been working a long time, but I’ve NEVER been marched in front of the world and pointed at when I’ve made a mistake. What the hell is this?!
Finally, this is how you lose good employees. If I were Adrian, I’d be FURIOUS with how this was handled and be looking for my next job. To be told that we expect passion and energy in your writing and when you do write something passionate, you’re treated as the site pariah. Maybe he should churn out some more forgettable content like how this turn signal is different from that turn signal or some milquetoast piece on yet another junkheap jeep from the glory days of past.
The internet is already filled to the fucking brim with folderol masquerading as content and entertainment. By pulling back and making this big of a stink about it, this site could go the way of where the majority of the founders defected from.
Support your writers, especially the good ones and be brave enough to stand behind them even if you feel they fucked up.
This, to me, falls into the paradox of tolerance. That is, we are of this mind that everyone’s opinion is valid so we should listen to everyone–even when they are uninformed, ignorant or just attention seekers. I do not believe that everyone is entitled to equal weight of their opinions; this is why we have subject matter experts like Adrian who DO know what they’re talking about.
Slow clap
When the framework of the article and its narrative seem more oriented toward the author forming ways to be snarky than actually honoring their responsibility to present facts to the reader, they’ve quite literally lost the plot.
Give me the facts. Spare me the purple prose. It’s usually as boring as singers that insert idiotic frippery and riffs into melodies and basically destroy the actual melody we’re hoping to hear.
Authors must remember that their primary job is transmitting information to the reader and that editing for conciseness is part of that duty. Spare me the snark.
The Rivian R3 is a car.
It is an electric car.
It is a good electric car.
Some people think it looks like an old car.
Those people are Shit-Witted Winkle Ti(dammit, there he goes again!)
Well, there is always the dictionary if that’s what you want! 😉
I’ve seen and heard too much for Adrian or anyone else here to offend me. It does get hard to read his articles sometimes when so many words are spent on trying to sound edgy or cool that he runs out of words to make his point. We all have opinions, even me, so if he wants to convince me that his viewpoint is right he has to help me (not a designer) understand it. This article (even edited) came across as “I’m an arrogant designer and you’re not so F you.” Ok, great, you may be right but I still don’t get it. His articles about the E-Type, however, were equally arrogant and flippant, but at least spent some time drawing lines and making mockups of his “fixes.” Sure, it took him two articles when one should have been enough, but he’s still new to this writing thing I think.
My advice would be this – The character of over-the-top arrogant a-hole is fine – but don’t let it distract from the point you’re trying to make. I like that each contributor’s voice is unique enough that I can generally tell who wrote a piece without looking at the by-line, and I can certainly tell that with Adrain’s writing, but he sometimes lets it get out of control into caricature territory. If he can balance actually making a point based on his alleged expertise with the snark being flavor instead of the whole bit it would be a lot more fun to read. His articles are a bit hit or miss on this for me, but I know there’s potential. With luck, practice, and coaching from the other great writers here I hope he finds his balance.
So, he’s sacked then?
I hope not. If he had submitted something so reprehensible that it didn’t pass muster from the get go, that’s one thing. The way I see this, it was some edginess that the EIC signed off on and then walked back. Retraction or editing doesn’t need to be grounds for dismissal.
I read it and didn’t even care so much about the YouTube people being called out – I kind of go to an empty place in my head when someone says “personality” or “influencer” – but it was a super haughty piece. How could all you idiots think that this box with four wheels and a very similar profile looks anything like that box with four wheels?? And then proceeded to dig deep into design specifics that had me zooming in on pictures to say, “huh, yeah I guess it’s different?” Like if someone laid into you because you pointed out the similarities between a 65° banked V8 vs 90°.
Anyway, for my part, put me on team “not really offended but not strictly necessary, either.” I do always learn a lot reading his rants, at the very least, and hope he’s getting not more than a stern talking-to and a jug of Aristocrat gin as punishmen.
Well it’s not like he was getting paid.
Not at all!
Of course not, I was really just being silly. I’m a N.C. native, but I always read his work with my best M. Python accent, so it was just a lame reference.
P h e w
I can’t afford to adopt Uncle Goth for stefsunnamedpuffalumpblog.net.
I just assumed Uncle Adrian got a big snoot of bad gin. Not that there is a good kind.
If it can be replicated in bath tubs, I don’t drink it.
Some say he grows his own juniper berries…
He’s definitely got a pair of them.
All we know is, he’s called The Bisho… wait a minute.