WomanOnWheels.ca

The best stories at Driving.ca for 2023...

"What were your favorite stories of 2023?" the editors asked all of us, and so we replied ... find out which ones they were over at Driving.ca.

It's moving day!

I had to keep this under my hat for a little bit, but you're looking at my Big Move. I've always been a freelancer, but for the last 30 years or so, my newspaper outlet was the Toronto Star.

The paper made a decision to get rid of its automotive freelancers, and that included me. Fortunately I was able to make a move, and now I'll be contributing to the National Post and its online presence, Driving.ca.

The Star will still run a few of my stories that were assigned before the decision, so there will be a little bit of overlap for a while, but I'll be showing up in the National Post starting in June. I hope I live up to everyone's expectations there!

I'll still be at my other outlets, including Autofocus.ca, Old Autos, and a few industry magazines such as Tire News. Since it was owned by The Star, I'll no longer be in the newspaper Metro.

I have to thank the Toronto Star for so many years of publishing my scribblings, and to the National Post for taking a chance on me. See you in the papers!

 

 

Wozeroff: Check it out!

My friend and fellow writing colleague Wade Ozeroff has joined the Website World. Wade is an immensely talented writer and cartoonist, as well as an all-around nice guy and with one of the best senses of humor out there. And I'm saying all that 'cause it's true. Check out his new site, Wozeroff, by clicking here.

On writing: Me done write real good

Like every old fogey before me, I see that the world is getting worse. At least, the world of writing seems to be taking a bit of a tumble, judging by some of the stuff I see floating around the Internet and in print (which includes press releases, advertisements and supposedly professionally-made signs).

Not to say that I haven't made my share of howlers over the years, and undoubtedly will do so in future, but it still irks me whenever I see an otherwise well-written piece with a glaring error. Not a typo, which I can almost forgive (and I better, because I make enough of them), but genuine lack of understanding of what one has written. Here's a partial list of what makes me grind my teeth to powder these days. Feel free to chirp in with any others you regularly see.

Impact. Yes, it can technically be used as a verb, but that impacted me just sets me off. What's wrong with "affect"? The problem with throwing impacted around as much as people do is that it loses its potency. Once we overuse our big-ticket words, we get into such silly situations as having to use "superstar" for a real actor, because we've used up "star" for people on reality shows. An impact is big. If a two-cent increase in the price of coffee impacts you, how do you describe what's happening to people in Japan?

Begs the question. It's properly used to describe an unsupported conclusion. You can read a very good description of its proper use by clicking here. It does not mean the same thing as "raises (or asks) the question," although many writers seem to think it does.

Its and it's. One's possessive, one's a contraction. It's time to look at its use.

The colon. For some reason, overuse of this poor little piece of punctuation has recently spread throughout the writing community. It isn't always necessary to use it to introduce a list. The car has power windows, locks and mirrors, not The car has: power windows, locks and mirrors. If a word introduces the list, you don't need to throw in a colon as well (unless, of course, you're a proctologist).

Utilize. What's wrong with use?

Literally. It means exactly what it says: something actually happened. A car can't literally raise the bar, because it doesn't have any arms. If your jaw literally hit the floor, the rest of your body better be down there too. Many writers confuse it with figuratively. And even if you are using it properly, it usually isn't necessary. She literally fell to the ground really isn't an improvement over she fell to the ground.

Unique. It's an absolute. If something's unique, it's the only one of its kind. It can't be more unique, mostly unique, kind of unique, the most unique, a little more unique or anything else you want to throw in. First resist the urge to describe how unique it is, and then ask yourself: is it actually unique? Very few things really are.

Got any others?

 

Some advice for aspiring auto journalists and photogs ...

 Prior to their opening to the public, the auto shows have "press days" where the automakers present their new models to be photographed for the various newspapers, magazines and websites.

In the last little while, I've noticed something that really bugs me: more and more media folk who think they're the only ones at the show, and who make it very difficult for the rest of us to take our pictures. I hate to generalize, but for the most part, they tend to be young and relatively new at the game. Guys, if you want to be considered professionals, you need to remember that - as Red Green says - we're all in this together. So please:

Look around you. See me there, pointing my camera at the car, waiting for you to move away from it? I realize we can't constantly be doing 360-degree sweeps every moment we're near a fender, but use some common sense. Don't stand beside the all-new model to have a conversation with your buddy.

Get your photo, then get out. Don't stand beside the car while you check all 30 photos on your camera screen. Take a couple of steps back out of my frame to do it. The car will still be there if you need to shoot a couple more.

Don't hog the car. I understand that your site needs a lot of detail shots. Still, take a look around. If you're halfway through shooting every nut and bolt, and you see me there waiting to take one quick shot of the whole car, then step back, let me get my picture, and then go back to your work.

Close the car up when you're done. Shut the door or trunk once you've finished inside, so I don't have to do it before I get my shot.

Stay at your place in the scrum. At the unveiling, you'll notice that we've all staked out spots, checked our camera angles, and are waiting for the car to come out. We don't move when it does, and you shouldn't either. Don't stand up, move forward, hold your iPhone over your head or do anything that will put you in front of our lenses when that car comes out. We want a shot of the car, not you.

Think about what you're doing and how it affects others. You may think you're special, but you're not. You're just one of hundreds of journalists who are also trying to get the perfect photo. We all get in each other's way occasionally, but we say "I'm sorry" and we try not to do it again. Trust me: the only way you'll be treated as a professional is if you act like one, and it starts right here.

 

So what are the cars people want to buy?

  What's wrong with the domestic manufacturers? Well, if you ask the people who write letters to the editor, it's that they're not building the cars people want to buy. The letter-writers pick apart the Detroit Three because they're not producing the small, fuel-efficient vehicles that the public would pounce on and buy by the bucket-load, if only GM, Ford and Chrysler would build them.

But wait a moment. I just got the year-end results for US sales, and it seems there's a bit of a problem with that theory. In that country, the top-selling automobile in 2008 was the Toyota Camry. Second place? Honda Accord. Both of these are midsize cars.

Third and fourth place went to the Toyota Corolla/Matrix and the Honda Civic, respectively, but fifth on the list is the Nissan Altima, followed by the Chevrolet Impala. Cut to the Ford Focus and Chevrolet Cobalt, and there's the Malibu in ninth place. The Toyota Prius rounds out the list.

That means that, of the top ten passenger cars sold in the United States in 2008, only four of them are compacts (the Prius is, also, but I'll leave it aside due to its hybrid powertrain). And not one of them is a subcompact. If people really are clamoring for the tiny cars that the Detroit Three are lacking, then why aren't there are any subcompacts on the list? Every buyer out there could select a Chevrolet Aveo, a Honda Fit, a Toyota Yaris, a Nissan Versa, a Suzuki SX4, a Hyundai Accent, a Kia Rio. If the only reason no one's buying Big Three is because they don't make little cars, then logically, shouldn't the Top Ten be nothing but little cars?

Here's a fact: Americans want subcompact cars -- they just want other people to buy them. In the United States in 2008, midsize cars held the majority of market share, at 20.9%. Compact followed at 15.6%, then luxury at 5.9%. Subcompacts took only 3.8% of the total share of passenger cars, topping only sport, high-end luxury, and luxury sport.

In other words, in terms of size, the Detroit Three are building the cars people want to buy. Which makes me think that the mad rush they're all making to bring tiny-footprint, tiny-engine cars to market may satisfy the letter-writers ... but not the people who are actually walking into dealerships and driving away with a purchase.

What's that again?

Every now and again, Transport Canada will send me a list of the latest recalls; apparently, the agency gets the notice from the auto manufacturer and just runs it verbatim. So I'm not sure if it was someone at the government or someone at Cadillac, but taking a few bucks out of the kitty to purchase a dictionary might not be a bad idea:

No remedial action is required due to the unlikely-ness of such an occurrence.

Now that proper word use and spelling are no longer necessary ...

I carved this out of a press release I read today. I wish I could say it was the first time I'd ever received something like this, but it's becoming all too common. It's obvious that Spell-Check has its limits, and someone really should dip into the dictionary to learn the meaning of "unique":

The lineage of Zukor's Packard is rather unique: it's first two owners have stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

Webster wept ...

Auto Journalism: Where are the ethics?

On his blog, Joe Clark of Toronto tackles the thorny issue of ethics in auto journalism, and specifically he takes on The Toronto Star, where I'm published. It wasn't easy to read his entry from my chair, but overall, when it comes to the industry in general, he's right. You can read it by clicking here.

The problem of objective reporting turning into an advertorial crops up any time a product or service is reviewed, but automobiles and travel are the most likely to come under fire, and usually with good reason. That's quite the photo I've posted here. That's the resort where I stayed when I was on the launch of a family vehicle -- one that starts at $20,000. The people who buy the vehicle will probably never set foot in a place like that in all their lives.

I like to think that I do write objectively about the vehicles, no matter what the automaker does, but the public doesn't see it that way, and they shouldn't. I also know a few writers who never met a car they didn't like, because they never met a press trip they didn't like. Some of the old boys quiver with righteous indignation if people like Clark suggest that they have a price, but the fact is, some do. Many of the automakers have eliminated gifts on press trips, which didn't go over too well with some of them. (Mark Richardson, the editor mentioned in the story -- my boss -- tried to pass a ruling a couple of years ago with the Automobile Journalists Association of Canada that no member would accept gifts from automakers. It was voted down.)

I am the first to admit that I benefit from the perks of my job, and that I'm also guilty of non-ethical behavior. I've travelled to places I normally would never have a chance to visit (and Clark failed to note that the journalist, not the car company, keeps the frequent flier miles). I have kept many of the gifts. I have stayed in hotels and resorts I could never afford, eaten in restaurants I could never visit otherwise. That's the way this game is set up. It's not right. But short of quitting my job, I honestly don't know how to fix the system. I really don't. I wish I knew the answer.

Letters? Oh, yes, I get letters ...

As a freelancer, I work at home, rather than in an office; there are times I feel like I'm working in a bubble. That's why it's nice to get feedback from readers, whether it's through the printed newspaper or my online work. But every now and again, well ... let me share some examples from the mailbag.

The conspiracy theorist: A reader wanted me to investigate and expose GM for false advertising, claiming that it was advertising a car at a higher mile-per-gallon average than he figured its L/100 km rating was when converted. I investigated ... and reported that if he'd converted into Canadian gallons, instead of the smaller American ones, the math would work ...

Now there's an incentive: The inventor of a new auto-related product asked me to feature the product in a story -- in effect, a free ad. In return, he said, "I promise to read all your stories twice each time if you do."

I must have been asleep that day: A reader chided me for writing about new cars, and giving up my newspaper column on used cars. I told him I'd never written a column on used cars. He said I had, called me a fraud, and said he'd check the previous issues to prove it. Needless to say, I didn't hear from him again...

Feeling gassy: A reader was told by the dealer that her brand-new vehicle had been filled at an Esso station, but she wanted to patronize the Petro-Canada station closer to her house, and asked me what damage she might do to the engine by changing brands.

I think I saw that already: A reader mailed me a copy of a magazine article on old trucks, thinking I'd be interested in it. He apparently didn't notice that I'd written it.

Yes, that's a good reason: Someone complained when I found fault with a Pontiac; I needed to "stick to the positive," he said, "because GM employs the most people per car."

Ooookay: I mentioned that two mechanically-identical models had "unique sheet metal" to describe the styling. Someone wrote and told me I was wrong; he'd called the company, who confirmed they used the same type of sheet metal in both.

I'll get right on that: "Would you mind ranking, in order, the safest minivan to the least. Also, please confirm my assumption that American cars use soft metal that quickly loses its compression, thereby increasing fuel consumption after only five years."

Beverly Rae Kimes: In memorium

Beverly Rae Kimes has passed away. If my calculations are correct, she was 67. To say that the automotive world has lost a giant in the field is an understatement.

A writer and editor since 1963, Kimes had the helm of Automobile Quarterly for many years, and was a contributor for decades. She was the author or editor of more than twenty books, including the definitive history of such makes as Packard and Mercedes-Benz. She was also a rarity, a female writer and historian in a male-dominated field.

I had the opportunity to interview her by telephone in 2002 for Old Autos newspaper, and the first thing I mentioned was that when I first became aware of her writing, I assumed from her ambiguous name that she was a man. She said that just about everyone made that mistake, but in the early days, it was to her advantage: her meticulous work earned her a place on the page, and "By the time they found out I was a woman, (at a time) when women weren't regarded as favorably as they are today with regard to the workplace, I had already established myself," she told me. "I had been writing for several years, so they couldn't really take that out on me at that point."

Although she would gain a reputation as one of the top historians in her field, she told me that she'd known nothing about cars when she started. Fresh out of college, she first got a job with a theater magazine that folded shortly thereafter. Sent on a lead by her agent, the job turned out to be the fledgling Automobile Quarterly. Although she admitted her ignorance of automobiles, the editor hired her anyway, on the basis of the research she did for her Master's thesis. Her first story, on the Curved Dash Olds, sparked an interest in finding out the story behind the vehicles.

My story on her contained a minor error, which most readers would never have caught, but Kimes was mortified, especially when I showed her the transcript of our interview and she found the error was hers. I didn't realize it at the time, but she was recovering from a serious illness, which left her a little fuzzy at times. She requested (and received) a correction; her attention to detail would have allowed nothing less.

Kimes entered the field during the infancy of writing about automotive history, and along with a small handful of peers, she set the standard both for research, and for the stories that resulted. Every auto writer who's ever turned a key owes a debt to her, especially women writers, for whom Kimes put a foot in the door. I know I certainly do; all I can say is, thank you.

Writing about cars: it's all about the audience

Every now and again, I do a Google search on my name, just to see what's there. (C'mon, admit it, you do it too.) It seems I'm frequently a topic of discussion: I have a fairly sizeable fan club which, as the saying goes, wouldn't walk across the street to spit on me if I were on fire.

They're enthusiasts, and their basic complaint is that I don't write what they want to read. It's one of the major quandries of the profession: what audience are you trying to reach?

When it comes to automotive work, I find there are generally two types of readers. The first are people who aren't all that familiar with automobiles, and they're using reviews as a tool to help them make a buying decision. The second group consists of very knowledgeable drivers, who usually aren't buyers, and who read the reviews mostly for entertainment. My anti-fan club comes from this latter group; their main complaints are that I'm not technical enough, and that I talk too much about aspects of the car that don't interest them, such as wasting word count on cargo space and interior appointments.

Long ago, I decided that I wanted to focus on the first type of reader. I like helping people; I like explaining things to readers. I think the tone of my writing is suited to those who want to be walked through a car from bumper to bumper. The bulk of these readers will never take a car on a track, or feel the way it handles when tossed around a switchback. I respect the enthusiasts who do, but I'm not writing for them.

When I first started reviewing, the newspaper put me strictly on economy cars. I took a ribbing from some of my colleagues, who asked when I was going to start writing about "real vehicles". It bothered me, until one very wise writer said to me, "Someone who's spending $75,000 on a sports car doesn't give a damn what you think. But someone who's only got $16,000 to spend does, because she's depending on you for guidance."

That advice is as fresh today as when I first heard it. Decide who your audience will be, and then write for it. There's a large market for the entertainment articles, and I very seriously admire the brilliant work in publications like Auto Week and Car and Driver. But there's an equally large demand for bread-and-butter stories, and that's the direction I chose. First and foremost, it pays the bills, and secondly, it gives me satisfaction to know that my articles can be helpful to people. And third, it gives my anti-fan club something to talk about each week.

Where it all began ...

a I was going through some old paperwork and happened across this. It's the stub from my first paycheque as a writer.

It's dated May 9, 1970 and it's for $25.00. I was eleven years old and you better believe that was a huge sum of money back then. My mother was a receptionist at an auto bodyshop and she took home $62 a week.

The paper was the Toronto Telegram, now defunct (although I don't think my story was to blame). They had a special section for children, and they'd ask for submissions -- double-spaced, please, and don't forget to keep a carbon copy for yourself. I wrote a fantasy story about a flying horse, and lo and behold, it became the very first piece I had printed. They even included a little sketch of the horse that I'd sent with it. And a few days later, this incredible cheque came in the mail.

I'd been writing for some time before that; I spent almost all of my spare time in the recreation room, tapping out stories on an ancient Underwood Standard Typewriter that my grandfather bought for me (and which I still have, sitting here in my office). This was my first published piece, and from that moment on, I knew that no matter what, I was going to be a writer. I did manage to make that dream come true. And in an odd twist, if you look at the short length of the piece I sold them and the buying power of the dollar back then, I don't think I've had a story since that's paid quite as well. As they say, I peaked early, and it was all downhill from there.

Credit Goes Here

I've had several colleagues comment on the quality of my Web site and how well it's set up. I sure wish I could take the credit, but that belongs to writer, editor and good friend Kevin Allman. He designed everything you see here and got me started. You can check out his site by clicking here.

Religion in government ...

Totally unrelated to automobiles, I have an opinion piece in today's Toronto Star (coincidentally, the Sunday edition) on prayer in the Ontario legislature. You can find it here.

Never underestimate a cowboy ...

I was going through some pictures and came across this, and thought, hey, there's a story within a story. This was during the launch of the updated 2008 BMW 5 Series. The company put a group of journalists into the cars in Las Vegas, and we drove them to Monterey, California.

That's a lot longer than the average press trip, and my deadline fell smack in the middle of it. The problem is that I write in linear fashion: if I don't have the first line, I can't write the story. And try as I might, I didn't have a first line. The clock was ticking, and I was desperately trying to come up with something. Nothing sounded right; nothing worked. It was getting on for three o'clock, and I had to have the story done that night.

Well, every now and again, the world just turns in the right direction for you. BMW had turned the trip into a bit of a scavenger hunt, and we had to stop at a general store in the middle of nowhere. Other than the general heading of "California", I had no idea where we were. We hadn't seen any living thing other than cattle for two hours. Why this store even existed was beyond us, but we pulled in, and that's when I noticed the beat-up old Ford pickup across the road. A cowboy got out, as lean and dry and weathered as a Joshua tree, and he came over and looked at my German-made machine. I fully expected him to ask what type of car it was.

"Nice car," he said.

"Thanks," I said.

He looked at it, and then drawled through a walrus moustache, "That must be a brand-new one. The ones last year didn't have them headlights."

(You can read the whole thing here.)

Thought for today ...

A couple of things I wish more folks would figure out:

It's a crash or a collision. It's not an accident.

The vehicle does not go out of control. The driver loses control of the vehicle.

Thank you.

So you want to be an auto writer ...

There are three things in the world everybody wants to be: a movie star, a famous musician, or an automotive journalist. And while everyone realizes there's a tremendous amount of work and a fair bit of luck involved in making a go of the first two, many people think the third one is a piece of cake.

Here's the reality: yes, of course it can be done, but it's not as easy as it looks. And I'm not telling you that because I'm afraid you'll turn into my competition, but because that's the way it really is.

First and foremost, an automotive journalist is a writer. And I'm going to be brutally honest and say that just because you can write a letter, it does not make you a writer. Writing is like music: it involves some natural talent, which then needs to be honed through a great deal of practice. I don't think there's a writer on the planet who doesn't look at his or her earlier work without cringing. If you think you'll one day get to the point where you can't get any better, then you've got a lot to learn.

Okay, so you can write, and you know something about cars -- where do you begin? Usually it's at the bottom. I started some 30 years ago by writing pieces for a local car club's newsletter for free. And I also started my rejection letter collection. Every writer gets them, no matter what the subject or how good the writer -- sorry, we feel your work is not appropriate for our publication. So you spend a few seconds wallowing in self-pity, and then you try to make your piece better, and then you send it off again. (Under my Magazine Features link to the right, you'll find one for an article called Rejection or Refusal, which you might find helpful.)

Whether it gets recognition, whether you get paid well for it, the goal is to have published stories that you can put together for your portfolio, which is what you show to editors to prove to them that you can do the job. Writing is a funny profession in that it can help to have a specialized education, but whether you do or you don't, your work will do the talking for you. The editor doesn't care if you've got a diploma in journalism if your work isn't right for the publication. (For the record, I don't have one; I never went to university.)

There's no magic formula for getting your stories in print, aside from hard work and perseverance, although I can tell you what won't work. You won't get very far if you bully editors, call auto companies demanding to be given test cars, if you turn in sloppy work, or if you try to present credentials you haven't earned. And with so many people out there running after a limited number of writing positions, you've got to stand out. I will admit that the novelty of being female in a male-dominated industry has sometimes helped me (although a few times it hindered me in the early days of my career). But I also carved out a niche for myself by reviewing the economy cars that some of my colleagues wouldn't be caught dead driving, and by writing for people who bought cars they didn't understand -- which is the majority of consumers -- by never using a term without explaining it.

And while it is possible to make a good living at writing, it takes time to get to that point. It was only in the last few years that I was able to quit my secondary jobs and devote myself full-time to writing. I also supplement my income by writing a lot of articles that are not related to automobiles. But the big thing is that you have to consider this as a job, and it's one that doesn't necessarily come with regular hours. On the Saturday nights when you're out with your friends, I'm often here at the keyboard because a story is due. If you don't respect deadlines, the editor won't respect you.

If any of this turns you off the idea, then by all means write because it pleases you, but don't expect to become a professional writer. On the other hand, if you can look all of this in the eye, take a deep breath and say okay, I'm ready, let's get this show on the road -- then here's hoping that combination of talent, skill, hard work and a bit of luck all comes together for you. See you in the papers.