Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
Unintended Accleration? Beware of TV Network Fraud
You've already seen the ABC News piece about a college professor rigging up a Toyota Avalon so he could induce a short circuit that would cause unintended acceleration. It's a frightening demonstration. And as detailed yesterday, it's also bad journalism.
We've seen this sort of thing happen before. Sometimes the major TV networks, despite all their gravitas and prestige, seem to toss their ethics out the window if they get the chance to show a gory story that involves automotive accidents.
There have been several instances in the past when investigative reports from network television showed horrific safety crashes that made the vehicles involved look dangerous. But it later turned out that those tests were fraudulent. Is ABC engaging in the same tactics?
John McElroy is host of the TV program "Autoline Detroit" and daily web video "Autoline Daily". Every week he brings his unique insights as an auto industry insider to Autoblog readers.
Back in 1987, CBS's 60 Minutes famously hired a plaintiff's witness, William Rosenbluth, who claimed he could cause an Audi to experience unintended acceleration. But he had to disassemble the transmission, drill holes in it and attach a tank of compressed air to make it happen-something that would never occur in the real world. But 60 Minutes never mentioned these facts, and presented Rosenbluth's test as proof that Audi had a defect. It single handedly nearly destroyed Audi in the American market. It took the company 20 years to recover.
In 1993, NBC's Dateline even more famously rigged up a Chevy pickup with explosives to make it "blow up real good" in front of the cameras. It presented this as proof that GM had defective pick-ups. GM hired investigators who ultimately found that the Dateline test was nothing but a fraud. Dateline was forced to publicly apologize.
Worse, ABC had no input or rebuttal from Toyota. It left out the company's version of this event, or maybe never even asked for it. Toyota says it met with Mr. Gilbert, he showed them a test, and they pointed out how this could not cause unintended acceleration. Now the company claims Gilbert showed a different type of test to ABC News. Toyota says it welcomes the chance to evaluate what he's doing and it invites ABC to bring its cameras back for that demonstration.
ABC also featured Sean Kane of Safety Research and Strategies on its report of the Avalon's unintended acceleration. He was presented as a safety advocate, but Mr. Kane makes his living by selling data and information to plaintiff attorneys, the very people who are going to be suing Toyota. Sean Kane has a vested interest in seeing Toyota sued, but ABC never mentioned that fact.
Plaintiff's witnesses like Sean Kane or William Rosenbluth make decent money testifying against car companies. They earn several hundred dollars an hour, whether they're on the stand or waiting around to be called to the stand. Presenting people like this as independent news sources, without identifying them for what they really are, violates all journalistic principles. Or at least it should.
Now, it could well turn out that Toyota does indeed have an electronics problem that causes unintended acceleration. But don't jump to conclusions based on last night's report from ABC News.
Autoline Detroit
Airs every Sunday at 10:30AM on Detroit Public Television.
Autoline Detroit Podcast
Click here to subscribe in iTunes
Tired of Toyota recall news? Try out the recall-free version of Autoblog.
We've seen this sort of thing happen before. Sometimes the major TV networks, despite all their gravitas and prestige, seem to toss their ethics out the window if they get the chance to show a gory story that involves automotive accidents.
There have been several instances in the past when investigative reports from network television showed horrific safety crashes that made the vehicles involved look dangerous. But it later turned out that those tests were fraudulent. Is ABC engaging in the same tactics?
John McElroy is host of the TV program "Autoline Detroit" and daily web video "Autoline Daily". Every week he brings his unique insights as an auto industry insider to Autoblog readers.
Back in 1987, CBS's 60 Minutes famously hired a plaintiff's witness, William Rosenbluth, who claimed he could cause an Audi to experience unintended acceleration. But he had to disassemble the transmission, drill holes in it and attach a tank of compressed air to make it happen-something that would never occur in the real world. But 60 Minutes never mentioned these facts, and presented Rosenbluth's test as proof that Audi had a defect. It single handedly nearly destroyed Audi in the American market. It took the company 20 years to recover.
In 1993, NBC's Dateline even more famously rigged up a Chevy pickup with explosives to make it "blow up real good" in front of the cameras. It presented this as proof that GM had defective pick-ups. GM hired investigators who ultimately found that the Dateline test was nothing but a fraud. Dateline was forced to publicly apologize.
ABC never really explained how this short circuit demonstration worked.
Back to the ABC News report. First off, ABC never really explained how this short circuit demonstration worked. It showed professor Dave Gilbert, from the automotive department at the University of Southern Illinois, with what looked like a volt meter with wires sticking out of it. He said that he could use that to induce a short circuit that would cause the car go to full-throttle acceleration, yet leave no error code that a mechanic could later trace. Maybe a more detailed technical explanation would be too much for a mass TV audience to understand, but ABC wants us to swallow Gilbert's demonstration with next to no details of what he was really doing.Worse, ABC had no input or rebuttal from Toyota. It left out the company's version of this event, or maybe never even asked for it. Toyota says it met with Mr. Gilbert, he showed them a test, and they pointed out how this could not cause unintended acceleration. Now the company claims Gilbert showed a different type of test to ABC News. Toyota says it welcomes the chance to evaluate what he's doing and it invites ABC to bring its cameras back for that demonstration.
ABC also featured Sean Kane of Safety Research and Strategies on its report of the Avalon's unintended acceleration. He was presented as a safety advocate, but Mr. Kane makes his living by selling data and information to plaintiff attorneys, the very people who are going to be suing Toyota. Sean Kane has a vested interest in seeing Toyota sued, but ABC never mentioned that fact.
Plaintiff's witnesses like Sean Kane or William Rosenbluth make decent money testifying against car companies. They earn several hundred dollars an hour, whether they're on the stand or waiting around to be called to the stand. Presenting people like this as independent news sources, without identifying them for what they really are, violates all journalistic principles. Or at least it should.
Now, it could well turn out that Toyota does indeed have an electronics problem that causes unintended acceleration. But don't jump to conclusions based on last night's report from ABC News.
Autoline Detroit
Airs every Sunday at 10:30AM on Detroit Public Television.
Autoline Detroit Podcast
Click here to subscribe in iTunes
Tired of Toyota recall news? Try out the recall-free version of Autoblog.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Tourian 11:04AM (2/24/2010)
I don't care if the test is a sham or not, if its possible that it can happen or not. The problem is Toyota covered up issues with their cars to avoid recalls and to keep their reputation clean.
That is the bottom line.
Reply
Dude 11:20AM (2/24/2010)
Tampering with a car and making it do weird things is proof of nothing. He did the modern version of sticking gum on the accelerator cable.
paul34 11:21AM (2/24/2010)
What? We're talking about the specific test that happened here, and the skepticism surrounding it.
So you "don't care" whether this entire story is a sham (which it may not be, no one is sure yet) just because of other mistake Toyota made?
Because Toyota messed up, it justifies possibly creating false stories and fearmongering about Toyotas... even more so, it justifies the suspension of journalistic standards?
Take off your blinders, dude.
Scott 11:29AM (2/24/2010)
This is why the country panics. The general population doesn't care for the truth, or what the statistics even mean.
Tourian 11:52AM (2/24/2010)
No, you misunderstand me. I don't let sensationalism sway my judgment. I didn't say I believed it or not. My concern is with how Toyota has handled this. How you react to ABS's story is on you. I'm responding to Autoblog and Mc Elroy in saying I don't care how this guy made that Avalon act up. It does not let Toyota off the hook for not recalling these cars sooner and acknowledging there was a problem when they first knew about it.
Throwback 11:53AM (2/24/2010)
So the truth doesn't matter because you have already made up your mind? I hope you never serve on a jury.
Tourian 11:58AM (2/24/2010)
"Not knowing enough about either Gilbert's test procedure or the Toyota hardware in question, we cannot say with any certainty if the demonstration was realistic."
This line in Autoblog's entry is enough for me. Don't worry about my judgment skills. Worry about your own.
TobyJC 12:32PM (2/24/2010)
Tourian, no need to defend your self. It's already so obvious that you are biased and anti-toyota you don't need any real evidence, proof or reason to bash them.
ashwinaj 12:39PM (2/24/2010)
I'm sure all automakers would've reacted the same as Toyota did for this issue, although I think the media is going overboard since they have no silly celeb story to cover to fill air time. I refuse to accept news from so-called journalists who come up with words like carmageddon, staycation etc. and quote their stupid opinions on issues rather than stating hard facts.
Unfortunately, it's all about the bottomline for the media and automakers alike.
Azrael4h 2:14PM (2/24/2010)
Apples to oranges, Tourian. This is not about Toyota's lack of safety in their cars, but the "test" conducted by ABC.
It it irrelevant what Toyota did with their actual faults; as this is a fraudulent test intended to destroy a company's reputation further than their own actions have already done.
ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, CNN; all are guilty of fraudulent misbehavior. All the stories on them are at best half truths mixed with fabrications. John McElroy mentioned a few times; however any 8 year old with half a brain and a few moments can disprove any story on the news.
Anyone who listens to these frauds deserves to have their car accelerate into a tree. Maybe it'll clean the gene pool for someone who thinks for themselves rather than believes what ever is on CNN.
why not the LS2LS7? 2:21PM (2/24/2010)
Azrael4h:
Can you take a few moments and disprove this one for us then please?
Tourian 2:34PM (2/24/2010)
Autoblog's response to the test as well as McElroy's response are biased. They are just commentary and should be rated up or down as we see fit. They aren't news. He start's off talking about a guy drilling holes in an Audi's transmission and someone putting bomb's on Chevy's pickups when Autoblog themselves admit they don't know enough about the test or Toyota's electronics to draw an informed conclusion. So we are left to believe that "the test" is no better then sabotage because of the "Examples" mentioned. Has investigative reporting always been bad? Has there never been a positive outcome of the media doing a in depth report on the automotive industry? These two autoblog entries would like us to believe that there never has been, and without having any expertise themselves, they would have us to believe it is sabotage and not worth reading into.
This is hypocritically bad journalism.
Pat 2:51PM (2/24/2010)
Nobody every said that this was journalism; it's a blog with a comments section that sometimes acts as a forum!
On a slightly different topic,
It's one thing when one person thinks you're wrong, but it's another when a group thinks you're wrong. Step back, forget peoples' opinions on Toyota and ABC as well as yours, and read the comments below yours and analyse people's reactions to your initial and subsequent comments.
Tourian 3:00PM (2/24/2010)
Having a lot of people think I'm wrong is okay. I'm a big boy, I can handle it. I could go to China and find a billion people who disagree with me on a lot of things, that's okay. A blog is not just for one group to express their ideas and opinions and not here a dissenting opinion. I'd encourage you to understand that and step back and reread my comments again.
theautoprophet 11:08AM (2/24/2010)
See my blog for further commentary on this issue. Prof. Gilbert's test may in fact be valid, but his failure mode may be very very rare. What he did was to short circuit the two voltage output lines for the independent hall effect sensors, using a resistor to change how much "crosstalk" occured between the two lines. With the proper resistance chosen, he was able to trick the ETC system into thinking that there was not a fault.
In other words, he found a hole in their diagnostics system, but a very small one. For this to happen in the field, just the right amount of resistance would have to appear between two separate wires. Possible? Maybe. Likey? Probably not.
Reply
ronnie schreiber 1:31PM (2/24/2010)
Also, the only way he was able to get the engine to to go WOT was to take the short circuit between the two sensors and to that add 5v from the sensor power rail. So the only way he was able to get "unintended acceleration" was by cascading two electrical faults on top of each other.
He never shows how this would happen in real life other than to attribute it to "corrosion, moisture and manufacturing imperfections". Until he can produce a pedal assy from a crashed Toyota with such electrical faults, or he can reproduce them by putting a pedal unit in a salt spray cabinet, he's no different than Dateline NBC and their explosive rigged pickups, only in his case, he's not even hiding the switches. He just says, see, I did it, and we're supposed to believe him because he's a "professor".
Look at his CV and the "automotive technology" program where he teaches. I value good technicians, mechanics and troubleshooters but Gilbert is a glorified auto shop teacher. I know cars are complicated and all that but the idea that you can get a BS in being a car mechanic just doesn't sit right with me and I'm hardly an elitist.
Steve31047 11:43PM (2/24/2010)
W. Edwards Deming says "Murphy was an optimist." Given the Toyota strategy to which Prof. Gilbert alluded, that the redundant sensors were expecting voltage levels in the same range, makes it much easier for one of those "Murphy" errors to go undetected. Prof. Gilbert implied that a different strategy, perhaps using dissimilar voltage levels, would have been a much sounder design choice in such a critical system.
Mickey 11:10AM (2/24/2010)
John, While I always listen and appreciate your automomotive insight, it important to point out the reason why the professor rigged the car the way he did - To show that an Error code would not show up on the diognostic - therefore Toyoto or anyone else would NOT be able to detect if there was an accellerator problem, which may be one of the reasons/excuses that the dealers and corporate sat on their hands. But taking the issue a step further is where Toyota failed with its brovado
Reply
Kumar 12:48PM (2/24/2010)
So basically this 'slam' on Toyota may end up helping them. We've already seen the company line 'no errors with electronics'. So if it is found to be a rare glitch, then Toyota is already doing everything you would expect them to do if an error is detected. Then would boil down to whether they knew in advance of the floor mat recall, or are just now finding out that a certain set of conditions can cause failure. I was definitely in the boat with people thinking it was just a bunch of older people too embarrassed to admit they forgot which pedal to mash down on when all of this broke.
I still don't get why these cars with on/off buttons can't at least go retro with a 80's voice that says 'ingition on' when you turn it on, or some geeky star wars/trek theme. When you press it while driving, it should say 'please hold button for 3 seconds to turn off', or 'press again to turn off'. It's not like we're not used to listening to navs units talking to us already or anything... ;)
raceranger9 11:19AM (2/24/2010)
McElroy talking about bad journalism, that's funny!
Reply