jpd80 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) 57 minutes ago, Bryan1 said: How is Ford's conduct childish here? TFL was invited to the product reveal and got greedy or wasn't thinking and posted the pics before the reveal. TFL should be ashamed of themselves instead of trying to shame Ford. It is unfair to Ford and unfair to all the other sites who waited. If Ford in response made a bratty video mocking TFL and posted a tweet with black tape over the TFL logo and then banned them for life and said no more TFL then that would be childish, pathetic and obnoxious. Writing them a letter univiting them was what they had to do. Roman and Andre should rethink what they are doing. They don't always have to be first on everything. Come on, It was a bit of fun. If you watch the video, you'll see Nathan pull the tape off the Ford badge and put it on Romans mouth telling him he was not being objective. Ford's ban was comprehensive, F150 launch, Bronco launch, press access The ban is childish because now it gives the spies impetuous to pass on everything that comes their way, you don't clamp a leak with a ban, you get them to sign a NDA and put them on the inside. Edited June 20, 2020 by jpd80 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 24 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said: Childish is the best way to describe it. How can you call it childish when they’re simply protecting their intellectual property? Those were details that Ford did not want to reveal yet. It also puts the other blogs and amazon at a disadvantage. Had this been pubic pictures it would be different. This is the only way a Ford can punish bad behavior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 6 minutes ago, jpd80 said: you don't clamp a leak with a ban, you get them to sign a NDA and put them on the inside. Who said they didn't have an NDA? NDAs are only as good as how well they are enforced Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: Who said they didn't have an NDA? NDAs are only as good as how well they are enforced They didn't have a NDA. if they did there would be huge financial consequences. Edited June 20, 2020 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 9 minutes ago, akirby said: How can you call it childish when they’re simply protecting their intellectual property? Those were details that Ford did not want to reveal yet. It also puts the other blogs and amazon at a disadvantage. Had this been pubic pictures it would be different. This is the only way a Ford can punish bad behavior. The question now is what more TFL will reveal in the next four weeks, will they stop posting revealing pictures or will they go even harder with more details? I'm hoping they reflect and put out a public apology to Ford for enabling the primary release of commercialy sensitive images and details, it's not the thing a reputable organisation should be doing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 8 hours ago, Bryan1 said: I don't believe it was from a camoed mule that they found running around in the wild in Colorado. The article says they were emailed pictures from an "anonymous" source and they posted them. I can't find the post so it appears they deleted it. If it was just a mule in the wild they wouldn't have deleted the pics and nobody would have a problem. If that is the case, how about you go after the leaker. There is a major problem in this country with leakers, and very little consequence for doing so. It is F’n infuriating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 5 hours ago, blwnsmoke said: I usually enjoy their videos but I am always critical when professional reviewers state incorrect info. If you are going to be a professional reviewer, then know your stuff. IE - fordpass works from satellites... um no, it uses 4G cell signals.. not satellites. I concur, that was a mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted June 20, 2020 Author Share Posted June 20, 2020 10 minutes ago, tbone said: If that is the case, how about you go after the leaker. There is a major problem in this country with leakers, and very little consequence for doing so. It is F’n infuriating. TFL was the leaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 1 hour ago, akirby said: How can you call it childish when they’re simply protecting their intellectual property? Those were details that Ford did not want to reveal yet. It also puts the other blogs and amazon at a disadvantage. Had this been pubic pictures it would be different. This is the only way a Ford can punish bad behavior. Do you or the others who think the ban is acceptable even remember what TFL specifically posted that got them banned? I don’t at this point, which shows you how insignificant it was or how terrible my memory is. At this point, any positive press the Bronco gets is good press, because Ford sure as heck hasn’t done a bang up job of promoting it so far. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, Bryan1 said: TFL was the leaker. TFL is a conduit. A person provided the information to TFL. TFL didn’t sneak into Ford and steal the info, it came from an insider presumably. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 10 minutes ago, tbone said: TFL is a conduit. A person provided the information to TFL. TFL didn’t sneak into Ford and steal the info, it came from an insider presumably. But in hindsight, they should have shown better judgement and not been involved with primary release of those pics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 1 minute ago, jpd80 said: But in hindsight, they should have shown better judgement and not been involved with primary release of those pics. That is a fair argument. I think Ford and TFL should have sat down and worked it out, instead of Ford summarily dismissing them. It would have been better for both parties. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 8 minutes ago, tbone said: That is a fair argument. I think Ford and TFL should have sat down and worked it out, instead of Ford summarily dismissing them. It would have been better for both parties. Most other organisations that post pictures like that are asked to take them down, I have to assume that TFL declined and knew the consequences, if not maybe rough justice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted June 20, 2020 Author Share Posted June 20, 2020 Roman said nobody warned them. This is very misleading. They all know they have to follow embargoes as they followed them before. So what did they expect? Roman is coming off as an arse with the tape on his mouth and trying to get subscribers fighting eachother because of their mistake. People with websites come and go. People aren't going to watch their videos if the best selling truck is missing. He should have just apologized to Ford. . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, Bryan1 said: Roman said nobody warned them. This is very misleading. They all know they have to follow embargoes as they followed them before. So what did they expect? Roman is coming off as an arse with the tape on his mouth and trying to get subscribers fighting eachother because of their mistake. People with websites come and go. People aren't going to watch their videos if the best selling truck is missing. He should have just apologized to Ford. If those leaked pictures were from Ford then yes, there would be an embargo in place until the prearranged release date was reached. That would make far more sense than TFL receiving unsanctioned pictures from a Ford employee or subcontractor. It also explains how many news sources get the pics at the same time. Edited June 20, 2020 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 7 hours ago, tbone said: That is a fair argument. I think Ford and TFL should have sat down and worked it out, instead of Ford summarily dismissing them. It would have been better for both parties. Agree-in particular as these guys give Ford so much press. And to your earlier point, just what were the offending shots that were released? With 3 EBs in the family I'll usually get at least one call a day from one of my sons saying..."any news today?" I don't recall seeing anything that I can say was a "holy S---" moment. And how much info is passed out "in confidence" but with a "wink-wink". Bottom line as I see it, the guy who called that shot is some jerk at Ford who wants to prove he is a tough guy. Now if Ford wants to get pissed at someone, they should go after the guy who wrote about the timing of the Bronco release and the fact it was also OJ's birthday. Forgot who it was but this guy says words to effect when Bronco was canceled it had a cloud around "roll over" issues! You don't suppose he meant to say "Bronco II"??? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 8 hours ago, tbone said: Do you or the others who think the ban is acceptable even remember what TFL specifically posted that got them banned? I don’t at this point, which shows you how insignificant it was or how terrible my memory is. It was pretty significant. It was pictures of the controls showing the rear sway bar disconnect and front and rear locking diffs plus a pic of the sway bar mechanism. And the roof latch and shifter showing the ultra low creep gear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 1 hour ago, jpd80 said: If those leaked pictures were from Ford then yes, there would be an embargo in place until the prearranged release date was reached. That would make far more sense than TFL receiving unsanctioned pictures from a Ford employee or subcontractor. It also explains how many news sources get the pics at the same time. Those pictures looked too blurry and rushed to be official press photos. Someone on the inside had to have given them out. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 10 hours ago, Bryan1 said: How is it childish? If you want to see childish look at the TFL response video. What does TFL usually being fair have to do with it? If PUTC was still up and running I don't think Mark Williams would post it. TFL lacks common sense if they still think this ok. The Truth Site that usually posts fake news would have posted it no doubt but they have also been banned. Well we can always agree to disagree.....I get your point here, but Ford looks so fucked up right now with the Bronco launch, and everything else going on, I just think it could be handled differently. Now, having said that, it will be interesting to see how TFL plays the game going forward. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 15 minutes ago, kyle said: Well we can always agree to disagree.....I get your point here, but Ford looks so fucked up right now with the Bronco launch, and everything else going on, I just think it could be handled differently. Now, having said that, it will be interesting to see how TFL plays the game going forward. In the grand scheme of things this just a bump in the road...don't let a rabid interest of some people (hey I'm one of them) speak for the overall health of the company. This time next year people will (well should be) enjoying their Broncos and this is will be just some random history. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 9 hours ago, jpd80 said: Most other organisations that post pictures like that are asked to take them down, I have to assume that TFL declined and knew the consequences, if not maybe rough justice. If that is true, then I would consider it a fair response from Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying68 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 TFL is a media organization dedicated to automotive. They routinely get information that is under embargo, including press fleet vehicles that they test. They have never violated an embargo that I have seen. The pictures they published were sent anonymously to them, most likely a Ford employee, but not necessarily. All media organizations will publish information that they get. I don't know if they tried to contact Ford before publishing or not, but they are under no obligation to do so. Ford's response should have been nothing. If they are that concerned with leaks, they shouldn't be selectively enforcing bans (or intentionally leaking information) and they need to crack down on their own employees taking pictures and sending them out. The appearance to anyone outside of Ford is that Ford is being petty and stupid, blaming the leak on the media instead of their own lax security. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying68 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 On 6/19/2020 at 1:19 AM, fuzzymoomoo said: Boo freaking hoo Play stupid games, win stupid prizes Same thing happened to Jalopnik last year with Mach-E and somehow they survived. Good god the entitlement is maddening. Jalopnik has notified all auto manufacturers that they will absolutely not agree to any embargo. Any information they get they will publish. https://jalopnik.com/why-jalopnik-doesnt-do-product-embargoes-a-warning-to-1476491366 On 6/19/2020 at 9:23 AM, blwnsmoke said: Lmao, so just about everything they comain about on the 2nd lowest trim is fixed on the higher trims. Answer - Buy a higher trim, tbats why manufacturers do that. Idiot! It is a valid criticism of the interior especially when compared to Ram at similar price points. Even lower trim levels should have better fit and finish, even if using lower quality materials. There is no excuse for the vinyl edges to be pulled away from the plasti-chrome trim ring at the XLT level. That is just poor parts and assembly quality. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 1 hour ago, akirby said: It was pretty significant. It was pictures of the controls showing the rear sway bar disconnect and front and rear locking diffs plus a pic of the sway bar mechanism. And the roof latch and shifter showing the ultra low creep gear. If anything, it benefited Ford and generated more interest. And from and intellectual property standpoint, the competition wouldn’t be able to respond to it in such a short period of time. With that said, if they were politely asked to take them down. as previously mentioned, and they didn’t, that would be another story and worthy of a ban. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle I suspect. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 Meanwhile, the photos showing both a fully exposed Bronco and Bronco Sport are still up with no recourse. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.