Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JG
I have no problem with a magazine being involved in the manufacture of a kit car as long..As Reports, advertisments are factually correct
|
Thing is John as I see it.....
The adverts
weren't factually correct as the car was described as if it could be driven when it hadn't even been built.
Successive Python apologists condemned KC magazine for badmouthing the cars engineering almost as a smokescreen when they had only criticised the advert wording.
As time has gone on and the car HAS been driven, WKC? mag has disingeously argued retrospectively about it's performance as if this justifies the original adverts.
Den Tanner, in my opinion, has been diverted from his original fully justifiable crusade into a poorly judged slanging match not of his making.
To Precis:
WKC? will now, surely, argue with barrowloads of hindsight how good the car is to paint Tanner as the bad guy. Hence their latest offer for his magazine to drive the car. What they have achieved is to maintain BIG magazine coverage for a product that didn't even exist in it's current form when it was being feted in WKC?, that, surely, is grossly unfair on a multitude of conventional manufacturers and, in my opinion, unethical.......