Too Propah, Too Polite

We seem to be living in a golden age of automotive marketing. After all, coverage of every auto launch now looks like a red-carpet premiere and every review reads like the reporter and car company are about to jump into bed together… or proves that they already have. When was the last time you read a critique on a car? When were you told of compromises and deal-breakers in any car? Today’s influencers seem to be serving up only polite euphemisms – ‘might not be for everyone’, ‘nicely sorted ride’ or ‘impressive packaging’.

The phrases are polite and betray editorial caution. Or editorial surrender. In a world where brand narratives rule reviews and reports, are auto experts getting too docile? ‘Polite Syndrome Auto Reporting’? Reviewers once swaggered with authority. Reports of old named negatives and went on to weigh and justify their verdict. That voice – fearless, critical, unapologetic – seems to have died a quiet, backseat death.

Too Much Like Cricket

The auto media landscape increasingly reflects a cricket field, with marketing spin, idol worship and publisher caution ruling. Part of the shift is structural. Some carmakers own big stakes in the platforms that cover them. Auto sites are sometimes tied to media houses and ecosystems… Truth be told, vehicles and advertising budgets go hand-in-hand in monetisation strategies.

In a year when auto advertising on connected TV and digital display surged to record levels in the festive season, brands aren’t just selling products; they are buying reach and influence too. The line between editorial freedom and financial interest gets blurred when the carmaker is also a key advertiser. A reason this shift is easy to miss is that ‘kindness’ is masquerading as professionalism.

Let’s rewind to a typical launch event. A new SUV arrives amid breathless praise for its styling and features. After the evening party with Bacchus and cronies, media and influencer reports bury somewhere deep in the body copy a careful line about stiff low-speed ride or efficiency figures. Editorially, nothing has been hidden, but nothing has been emphasised either; at least not enough to shape buyer decisions. If criticism exists, it whispers. Only readers raised on blunt, verdict-driven tones used decades back by shows like Top Gear instinctively sense the difference.

Cushion of Language

Language reveals the cushions that are now darling verbiage. A cabin that should be called ‘cheap’ becomes ‘functional’. A clunky transmission suddenly ‘prioritises durability’. If the gearshift is archaic, adjectives alter that perception. We seldom have reviews where shortcomings are presented as actionable warnings, and not diplomatic footnotes. When critiques get softened, readers intellectually register the caveat, but do not appreciate its real-world consequences.

Carmakers are getting wily too, ensuring that embargo-driven stories reinforce the choreography. Reviewers attend curated launch drives on routes designed to flatter the vehicle. The conditions are tailormade to showcase strengths while muting irritants such as traffic, broken surfaces, long commutes and knee and back pain. Even in ‘clean’ reports, first impressions dominate headlines, deeper evaluation saved for later, if at all. Spectacle becomes the story.

Access Culture Rules

The influencer era intensifies this tonal shift. Automotive content now straddles journalism, entertainment and brand collaboration. Creators thrive on engagement, going heavy with visuals, personality and shareability, rather than a methodical critique. A cinematic walkaround filmed at sunset travels farther online than a sober analysis of ride quality in bumper-to-bumper traffic.

Launch-day coverage is a telling giveaway. Most reporters write near-identical stories within hours. The excitement is genuine and production values impressive. What’s missing is time. Time is the core ingredient for any meaningful meal. Car-lovers lament that true ownership insights surface only months after the launch, not in the initial reports and videos.

A few established media houses recognise this. Publications like Autocar India clearly distinguish between first drives and long-term tests, acknowledging that vehicles reveal their personalities only gradually. Yet, digital attention cycles reward immediacy. Early positivity spreads faster than delayed nuance, nudging the ecosystem toward friendliness over friction.

No Morality Trick This

This is not a morality report on influencers diluting journalism. Creators expand access, regionalise autom-talk and energise younger audiences. But if early access, hospitality and alliances form the backbone of visibility, the incentive structure has to lean toward civility. Few deliver harsh verdicts, not when tomorrow’s access depends on today’s professional goodwill and soft reports.

For buyers, the slow evolution of vehicle truth feels abstract until their ownership begins. A sedan praised for refinement may reveal a firm suspension over broken urban roads. A feature-heavy hatchback lauded for innovation might frustrate drivers with touch-centric controls in daily traffic. These are not catastrophic flaws, but compromises lived daily. Yet, they are precisely the nuances consumers expect reviewers to forewarn them on.

Thankfully, modern buyers are savvy. They assimilate information from videos, forums and owner feedback. But scattered anecdotes can’t replace clinical evaluation. A review that politely admits trade-offs without going in-depth risks leaving readers informed but underprepared. When a limitation is framed as a quirk and not a drawback, buyers often discount it. Months later, the ‘quirk’ becomes a daily annoyance. Trust erodes. Not because reviewers were dishonest, but because emphasis didn’t match lived experience.

Don’t Look for Villains

Positivity is not the villain here. Cars are emotional purchases and enthusiasm is part of the game. The issue is proportionality: do weaknesses receive the same narrative gravity as strengths? A polite review may be pleasant, but a candid review is useful. This is not to suggest that auto journalism has lost its compass, moral or otherwise. The ecosystem is more democratic than ever. But healthy media culture should frame critique as a consumer service, not a professional hazard.

We need transparency. Readers deserve clarity on all issues auto, such as curated drives versus long-term evaluation and commercial bedsmanships versus future media access. Methodology matters. Testing vehicles in real conditions produces insights no launch venue can replicate.

This is not an indictment, but an opportunity. Readers are discerning. Creators need to balance excitement with candour to be credible. Reviews should be impactful, not harsh. The job is to provide clarity, not comfort. Auto reportage (any journalism for that matter) is a service bridging reality and consumer expectation. The media has to offer more than hype: it has to provide perspective. In a market defined by aspiration, perspective is the only gas pedal car-buyers need.