The response from the Public Editor does not say that the review was faked - it says the opposite, starting with the headline "Problems With Precision and Judgment, but Not Integrity, in Tesla Test". Later it says "I am convinced that he took on the test drive in good faith, and told the story as he experienced it."

I have no interest in this dispute, but it's clear that the conclusion you drew about what the Times piece said is incorrect.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/publiceditor/2013/02/18/pro...

"Problems With Precision and Judgment, but Not Integrity"

The New York Times is hardly going to come out themselves and admit that they have a problem with integrity are they?

The sheer number of inaccuracies and the fact that they all cast Tesla in a poor light in this case was pretty telling, as were the financial incentives (Big 3 pay NYT's bills, Tesla doesn't).

That isn't what your link says. The reviewer was imperfect, and Musk still wrote "Faith in @nytimes restored" as though he were the aggrieved party.

The journalist who made mistakes resembles customers, and his experience should serve as a warning. The comments under that link are an example of the people who discredit Tesla for prospective buyers. They care about the conflict, and root for their team, without considering what it says about how the car maker would treat them.

I want to buy a good car, I don't want to buy into the experience of dealing with a thin-skinned billionaire on twitter, and his social media hangers-on, if I'm ever unhappy about the product in public.