In an effort to offer constructive criticism and to make the board a better place, let us take a look at the recently posted article entitled, "The 2021 Ram TRX Review".
I have long been a critic of Chrysler products and of the poor writing that passes for 'web journalism' these days, specifically on this board. The opening line of the article, "Because you can drive everything from a nine-horsepower Citroen 2CV to a seven-hundred-and-two horsepower TRX around the world." is not a complete sentence. The second sentence continues, "Eccentricities [peculiarities or quirks] can and do exist on either end of the spectrum. More importantly, [more importantly than what? The author has not mentioned anything 'important'.] we find it relevant to test a broad spectrum of off-road vehicles to stay abreast of market trends and emerging technologies—which typically debut on halo models like the TRX first.
The second paragraph isn't any better. "The TRX blends OEM reliability with a factory 35-inch tire and the most-impressive and highest-performing suspension we’ve ever driven on a street-legal off-road vehicle—and I used to own a Raptor. Those who want an exotic overlanding experience, without having to sacrifice reliability, serviceability, and dependability may want to take a closer look at the TRX. We’re looking at those Tacoma owners who fit long-travel suspension kits."
FACT: Chrysler builds some of the most unreliable vehicles on the planet. FCA is owned by Fiat, which is owned by PSA (Peugeot/Citroen). They too produce garbage vehicles. This is not a knock on Dodge, as much as it is on the author providing false data to the lay-reader. Decades of automotive data support the claim that Toyota produces some of THE most reliable vehicles on the planet. [Paging Scott Brady.]
It is incumbent upon the Editor-in-Chief to proof read every article that is posted. If there isn't an Editor-in-Chief, that responsibility falls to the Staff Writers. If you are not a professional author, put your best foot forward, buy an 'Intro to Writing' type of book or use the grammar and spelling check software that is likely included in your word processing program.
I am NOT a professional writer, but I have 12 years of elementary, middle and high school English classes and a year of college English under my belt. As a car guy, a finance guy and an outdoorsman, I should not be the one pointing out the disparity in the quality of writing here, compared to other boards. Finally, in the 'you-can't-hurt-my-feelings' world in which we all live, I am quite sure this will go over like a titanium balloon, but I am hopeful that it will open a few eyes and help improve the community. If you want to defend poor grammar, don't bother. There is no excuse for poor professional writing or inaccurate data in an article in this day and age.
Cliff's Notes: All of the staff writers could use an English class or two. Fire the Editor if there is one. If there isn't one, hire one as soon as possible. Check your data. Toyota trucks are infinitely more reliable than anything Chrysler builds. Do not use your influence in the market to mis-lead readers, even if that action is unintentional. Present verifiable facts, educate the reader, set an example and let him or her make their own, informed decision.
I have no constructive criticism on the remainder of the article, as I stopped reading after the second paragraph. [Paging Jonathan Hanson.]
"Rounding out our list is the Ram 1500. This truck has long been plagued with reliability issues and is continually on the bottom of most such lists." (https://pickuptrucktalk.com/2020/09/careful-what-you-buy-most-reliable-2020-full-size-trucks-ranked) The report is based on the last five years of reliability data taken from Consumer Reports.
EDIT: To prove the incident above is not an isolated one, I closed the Dodge truck article and opened one on a monocoque camper. In it, I find, "If you’re not entirely sure what a monocoque body is, don’t worry, I didn’t either."
Does anyone proof read these articles before they are published?
I have long been a critic of Chrysler products and of the poor writing that passes for 'web journalism' these days, specifically on this board. The opening line of the article, "Because you can drive everything from a nine-horsepower Citroen 2CV to a seven-hundred-and-two horsepower TRX around the world." is not a complete sentence. The second sentence continues, "Eccentricities [peculiarities or quirks] can and do exist on either end of the spectrum. More importantly, [more importantly than what? The author has not mentioned anything 'important'.] we find it relevant to test a broad spectrum of off-road vehicles to stay abreast of market trends and emerging technologies—which typically debut on halo models like the TRX first.
The second paragraph isn't any better. "The TRX blends OEM reliability with a factory 35-inch tire and the most-impressive and highest-performing suspension we’ve ever driven on a street-legal off-road vehicle—and I used to own a Raptor. Those who want an exotic overlanding experience, without having to sacrifice reliability, serviceability, and dependability may want to take a closer look at the TRX. We’re looking at those Tacoma owners who fit long-travel suspension kits."
FACT: Chrysler builds some of the most unreliable vehicles on the planet. FCA is owned by Fiat, which is owned by PSA (Peugeot/Citroen). They too produce garbage vehicles. This is not a knock on Dodge, as much as it is on the author providing false data to the lay-reader. Decades of automotive data support the claim that Toyota produces some of THE most reliable vehicles on the planet. [Paging Scott Brady.]
It is incumbent upon the Editor-in-Chief to proof read every article that is posted. If there isn't an Editor-in-Chief, that responsibility falls to the Staff Writers. If you are not a professional author, put your best foot forward, buy an 'Intro to Writing' type of book or use the grammar and spelling check software that is likely included in your word processing program.
I am NOT a professional writer, but I have 12 years of elementary, middle and high school English classes and a year of college English under my belt. As a car guy, a finance guy and an outdoorsman, I should not be the one pointing out the disparity in the quality of writing here, compared to other boards. Finally, in the 'you-can't-hurt-my-feelings' world in which we all live, I am quite sure this will go over like a titanium balloon, but I am hopeful that it will open a few eyes and help improve the community. If you want to defend poor grammar, don't bother. There is no excuse for poor professional writing or inaccurate data in an article in this day and age.
Cliff's Notes: All of the staff writers could use an English class or two. Fire the Editor if there is one. If there isn't one, hire one as soon as possible. Check your data. Toyota trucks are infinitely more reliable than anything Chrysler builds. Do not use your influence in the market to mis-lead readers, even if that action is unintentional. Present verifiable facts, educate the reader, set an example and let him or her make their own, informed decision.
I have no constructive criticism on the remainder of the article, as I stopped reading after the second paragraph. [Paging Jonathan Hanson.]
"Rounding out our list is the Ram 1500. This truck has long been plagued with reliability issues and is continually on the bottom of most such lists." (https://pickuptrucktalk.com/2020/09/careful-what-you-buy-most-reliable-2020-full-size-trucks-ranked) The report is based on the last five years of reliability data taken from Consumer Reports.
EDIT: To prove the incident above is not an isolated one, I closed the Dodge truck article and opened one on a monocoque camper. In it, I find, "If you’re not entirely sure what a monocoque body is, don’t worry, I didn’t either."
Does anyone proof read these articles before they are published?
