Manufactured Hate: You need to know who’s behind this!

[dalton108]

Credit has to be given to @WormtownKris for being the first on the forum (to my knowledge) to make the connection, but this needs to be called out more prominently, so, I started this thread.

Just proves what I’ve been saying about our modern society. We are surrounded by Machiavellians on one side, and morons on the other.

Even on within groups on the same side of issues like this. Here we have a Machiavellian with an agenda leading morons to their doom. ?

Sponsored

 

[Balthezor]

Asshole probably shorting the stock. It's all about money.

 

[dalton108]

Who is he?

WAAAYYY TO FUCKING LONG; DEFINITELY DID NOT READ: (AKA: Executive Summary)

Edward Niedermeyer is an automotive journalist and key organizer behind the “#TeslaTakedown” protests. His persistent anti-Tesla efforts have significantly fueled the negativity and backlash aimed at us Cybertruck owners and Tesla enthusiasts in general.

======================================================

Who is he? (prepared by deep research with my prompting)

Edward Niedermeyer’s Connection to Tesla and Role as a Critic

Edward “Ed” Niedermeyer is an automotive journalist, analyst, and author who has become widely known for his skeptical scrutiny of Tesla, Inc. and its CEO Elon Musk. Over his career, Niedermeyer has built a reputation as a prominent Tesla critic through his investigative reporting, his 2019 book Ludicrous: The Unvarnished Story of Tesla Motors, and more recently as an organizer of grassroots protests targeting Tesla’s practices. Below we examine Niedermeyer’s background, his notable publications and commentary on Tesla, his affiliations with media and industry groups, and how he is perceived among both critics and supporters of the company.

Professional Background in Automotive Journalism

Niedermeyer began covering the auto industry in 2008 and quickly gravitated towards analysis of new entrants like Tesla. He first wrote for The Truth About Cars (TTAC), where he eventually became Editor-in-Chief . During this time he often reported on industry giants (like GM and Chrysler) and on Tesla’s early struggles. After TTAC, he served as a senior editor at The Drive and later joined Automotive News as a reporter . His work has also appeared in major outlets including The New York Times, Bloomberg View, and The Wall Street Journal . In addition, Niedermeyer co-hosts The Autonocast, a podcast focused on autonomous vehicle technology, where Tesla’s self-driving claims are frequently discussed . This extensive industry background gave Niedermeyer a strong foundation to critically evaluate Tesla’s business and technology.

Notable Publications and Critical Commentary on Tesla

Niedermeyer’s bylines and commentary on Tesla span over a decade and have often challenged the company’s narrative. Some of his most significant Tesla-related works include:

• “Tesla Death Watch” Blog Posts: Early in Tesla’s history, Niedermeyer was involved in blogging that skeptically tracked Tesla’s viability. He wrote a series informally dubbed “Tesla Death Watch,” highlighting doubts about Tesla’s financial health and production promises. Tesla later pointed to this Tesla Death Watch series as evidence of his pessimism, referring to Niedermeyer as “the same gentle soul” who once ran that blog . These early posts established him as one of the first journalists willing to voice the possibility of Tesla’s failure, at a time when many were swept up in the company’s hype.

• Investigative Scoop on Suspension Failures (2016): Niedermeyer broke a high-profile story in 2016 regarding Tesla’s handling of a potential safety defect. He reported on a Tesla Model S owner who experienced a suspension breakage, and revealed that Tesla offered a goodwill repair only if the owner signed a gag clause (a non-disclosure agreement) . Niedermeyer’s reporting, published on the Daily Kanban site, raised concern that Tesla’s “Goodwill Agreement” could silence customers from reporting safety issues to regulators . The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) found the NDA language “troublesome” and pressed Tesla to remove any suggestion that owners shouldn’t contact authorities about defects . Tesla’s response was notably combative: the company issued an official blog post denying any suspension defect and personally attacked Niedermeyer’s credibility, accusing him of fabricating the story and suggesting he “may have something financial to gain by negatively affecting Tesla’s stock price” . (In other words, Tesla implied he was profiting as a short-seller.) This unusually direct corporate rebuttal – likened by The Verge to Theranos-style defensiveness – underscored how much Niedermeyer’s investigation rattled the company’s image . The episode not only sparked a public spat but also put Tesla’s customer service practices under regulatory scrutiny.

• Exposure of the Battery Swap “Scam” (2015): In another investigation, Niedermeyer scrutinized Tesla’s highly touted battery-swapping technology. In 2013 Elon Musk had demoed a battery swap station as a faster alternative to charging, claiming it could “swap” a depleted battery for a full one in minutes. Skeptical of why the feature wasn’t being rolled out to customers, Niedermeyer conducted an on-the-ground inquiry. He spent the 2015 Memorial Day weekend at Tesla’s lone battery swap site (Harris Ranch, California) and observed that no customers were actually using the swap service, even amid long lines at the Superchargers . He found Tesla brought in diesel generators to add charging capacity rather than activating the swap station, and afterward he concluded the “battery swapping” promise was essentially fake – a tactic to game California’s zero-emission vehicle credit system . (California awarded extra ZEV credits for fast-refueling capabilities, which Tesla could claim by appearing to offer battery swapping.) Niedermeyer reported that Tesla representatives gave misleading statements about the program’s usage, and that evidence of any real customer swaps was almost nonexistent. His work effectively exposed a gap between Tesla’s public claims and reality, bolstering critics’ view that some of Tesla’s “breakthroughs” were more about optics and incentives than genuine consumer-facing technology.

• Critiques of Autopilot and “Full Self-Driving” Claims: Niedermeyer has been one of the most persistent voices questioning Tesla’s autonomous driving hype. As early as 2016, he warned that Tesla was overselling the capabilities of its Autopilot driver-assistance system. In an October 2016 Bloomberg View column (aptly titled “The Only Thing on Autopilot at Tesla Is the Hype Machine”), he argued that Tesla’s branding of its new hardware as “Full Self-Driving” was misleading the public . He noted that Tesla was inviting a dangerous mismatch between owner expectations and the system’s true capabilities, all while Elon Musk preemptively attacked critics (at one launch event Musk claimed that journalists who write negative articles “are killing people” by discouraging autonomous tech) . Niedermeyer countered that media skepticism was in fact pointing out life-saving truths – namely, that Tesla’s tech was not actually self-driving and relying on it as such could be deadly . His critiques have often centered on this theme: that Tesla markets its driver-assist as if it were full autonomy, creating a “myth” around Tesla’s capabilities that reality doesn’t match. In 2019, Niedermeyer also helped unravel a widely-cited statistic that Tesla fans and Musk himself used to defend Autopilot’s safety. The NHTSA had reported a 40% reduction in crash rates after Autopilot’s Autosteer was installed, but Niedermeyer was immediately skeptical and investigated further . By obtaining and analyzing the underlying data, he demonstrated that the 40% figure was based on flawed methodology (it failed to control for other safety features and differing driving conditions) . This work, published on The Drive, effectively debunked the “40% safer” claim and showed that regulators had overestimated Autopilot’s benefit. Niedermeyer’s insights on Tesla’s semi-autonomous features have been cited repeatedly in discussions about the technology’s true performance and risks , solidifying his role as a key skeptic voice on Tesla’s self-driving narrative.

• Ludicrous: The Unvarnished Story of Tesla Motors (2019): Niedermeyer’s critical stance culminated in his book Ludicrous, a comprehensive chronicle of Tesla’s first 15 years under Elon Musk . Published in 2019, the book traces Tesla’s evolution from startup to automotive disruptor, and it pulls back the curtain on many of the company’s controversies and internal dramas. Drawing on original research and anonymous insider accounts (some sources insisted on anonymity “out of fear of Mr. Musk” according to a Wall Street Journal review) , Niedermeyer provides an unsparing look at Tesla’s business struggles, technological gambles, and the often over-the-top promises made by Musk. Ludicrous devotes significant attention to the cult-like fan culture around Tesla versus the growing community of skeptics (sometimes referred to as the “TSLAQ” crowd) . It explores how Tesla’s enthusiastic followers have frequently clashed with short-sellers and critics in a very public “confrontation,” especially on social media . Notably, Niedermeyer refrains from delving into Tesla’s stock valuation in the book, focusing instead on operational and strategic missteps. Reviews of Ludicrous acknowledged that Niedermeyer was coming from a skeptic’s perspective, but noted his deep understanding of the auto industry. The Los Angeles Times praised the author’s industry insight and pointed out he was well positioned to assess Musk’s “foibles” as Tesla fought to become sustainably profitable after years of burning investor cash . Even some who didn’t fully agree with Niedermeyer’s harsh assessment found the book informative – Forbes called it “a fascinating chronicle” and urged both Tesla fans and critics to read it, calling it perhaps “the best take on the company to date.” . The book solidified Niedermeyer’s status as a leading Tesla skeptic by compiling a decade’s worth of concerns and controversies into one narrative.

Affiliations and Role in the Tesla Skeptic Community

Through these writings and investigations, Niedermeyer became a prominent figure among the community of Tesla skeptics and critics often tagged as “TSLAQ.” TSLAQ is an informal collective of investors, analysts, and bloggers who are bearish on Tesla (the term riffs on Tesla’s stock symbol plus a “Q”, which in stock listings denotes a bankrupt company) . Niedermeyer is frequently cited in TSLAQ circles for his reporting, and in Ludicrous he even documents key moments in this skeptics-vs-fans battle – for example, the doxxing of a well-known Tesla short seller by Musk’s supporters . While Niedermeyer himself doesn’t engage in the more conspiratorial fringes of the anti-Tesla movement, his work often provides factual backbone to the skeptics’ arguments. His analyses of Tesla’s finances, production issues, and technological claims have been shared widely under the #TSLAQ hashtag on Twitter (now X), making him something of an intellectual leader among those dubious of Tesla’s hype.

In recent years, Niedermeyer’s activism has extended beyond the written page and online debates into real-world organizing against Tesla. In late 2023 and early 2024, as Elon Musk became increasingly political and controversial in other arenas, a wave of protests sprang up at Tesla showrooms across the United States. This movement, dubbed “#TeslaTakedown,” encourages demonstrators to gather at Tesla retail locations and voice opposition to Musk and Tesla – aiming to tarnish the brand’s image and ultimately impact its sales. Niedermeyer has been closely involved in this protest movement. He is based in Portland, Oregon, and has acted as one of the leading organizers of Tesla protests there , leveraging his social media following (particularly on the Musk-free Bluesky platform) to coordinate rallies.

Protesters outside a Tesla showroom chant and hold signs calling for Elon Musk’s ouster during a “Tesla Takedown” rally (February 2025) .

What began as a handful of small pickets has grown into dozens of “TeslaTakedown” demonstrations in over 65 cities by early 2025 . These rallies feature Tesla’s detractors carrying signs such as “Fire Elon!” and “Fight Fascism, Fight Musk,” reflecting anger at Musk’s recent actions and statements . Organizers (including Niedermeyer) argue that Tesla’s valuation and success are built on a bubble of hype and Musk’s persona – and that by exposing the disconnect between the myth and reality of Tesla, they can “hit Elon Musk where it hurts” (his company’s bottom line) . The protests have coincided with a slump in Tesla’s sales and stock price, as Musk’s public approval has slid, though it’s unclear how much the activism itself has contributed to these trends . The Tesla Takedown movement remains decentralized, but Niedermeyer’s participation has been high-profile enough that he’s been quoted in the press about its goals. He told Fortune magazine that the aim is essentially to drive down Tesla’s stock and “bankrupt Elon Musk,” viewing Musk’s diminished wealth as validation of their efforts (a stark reversal of the usual tech narrative that equates stock success with vindication) . While such a dramatic outcome is far from certain, Niedermeyer’s involvement in these public protests marks a new chapter in his campaign to hold Tesla accountable, moving from analyst to activist.

Aside from grassroots activism, Niedermeyer continues to engage with established media and industry groups. He is sometimes invited on podcasts and panels (for instance, The War on Cars podcast titled an episode “Tesla is a Fraud” featuring Niedermeyer) to discuss the ethical and safety issues he sees at Tesla . Through The Autonocast and other forums, he collaborates with other auto technology experts, contributing to broader discussions on electric vehicles and self-driving technology beyond just Tesla. This balancing of roles – journalist, author, and activist – is somewhat unusual, and Niedermeyer is careful to ground his critiques in factual evidence even as he takes a clear adversarial stance toward Tesla’s leadership.

Public Perception and Influence

Niedermeyer is a polarizing figure in the Tesla discourse. Among Tesla’s fervent fan base and investors, he is often viewed as an outspoken detractor (or even an “anti-Tesla” crusader) determined to undermine the company. Tesla’s own executives have treated him as an antagonist; the company’s 2016 blog rebuttal to his suspension story not only denied his claims but went so far as to insinuate he was lying for profit . Following that corporate blog post (titled “A Grain of Salt,” essentially warning readers to doubt Niedermeyer’s report), he experienced waves of online harassment from Tesla supporters . He’s been accused by some of bias or of having a personal vendetta against Elon Musk. Indeed, Tesla’s fan community often dismisses Niedermeyer’s critiques as FUD (“fear, uncertainty, and doubt”) spread by someone who supposedly wants to see Tesla fail – a perception likely fueled by his association with the TSLAQ short-seller crowd and the TeslaTakedown slogan. In the eyes of hardcore Tesla boosters, Niedermeyer is practically a ringleader of those rooting for the company’s downfall.

On the other hand, Tesla skeptics and many in the journalism community regard Niedermeyer as a significant and credible voice holding a powerful company to account. His long record of reporting on Tesla’s troubles – from production defects to bold claims that never panned out – has earned respect among those who believe a reality check on Musk’s narrative is overdue. Current Affairs magazine described him as “probably no greater expert on the career of Elon Musk and the development of Tesla” , and noted his expertise in both electric and autonomous car technology . Even some Tesla owners acknowledge that his criticisms, while pointed, are rooted in genuine industry knowledge. Regulators and safety advocates have also found value in Niedermeyer’s work; for instance, his analyses of Autopilot’s limitations have been cited in debates about autonomous vehicle regulations . By surfacing inconvenient facts (like the repair NDA or the unused battery swap stations), Niedermeyer’s journalism has at times forced Tesla to address issues it might have preferred to downplay. His book Ludicrous likewise has influenced the wider public and regulatory discourse by compiling Tesla’s “greatest hits” of controversy in one place – a kind of cautionary tale about Silicon Valley disruption meeting the realities of the car business . The book and his subsequent interviews have been referenced in discussions about everything from Tesla’s factory work culture to the safety of its driver-assist systems.

It’s fair to say Niedermeyer has become one of the best-known Tesla skeptics, a status reinforced by his foray into activism. Within the community of Tesla critics, he’s seen as a thought leader who was ahead of the curve in questioning the company’s rosy narrative. In the late 2000s, when Tesla was an upstart with the flashy Roadster, few could imagine it would achieve the success it did – yet Niedermeyer was already probing its weaknesses. Now, with Tesla an industry giant, he continues to spotlight its cracks (be it slowing sales, quality problems, or Musk’s polarizing behavior) and urge people to “look past the hype.” His efforts – in print, online, and on the street – have undoubtedly contributed to a more skeptical tone in coverage of Tesla. While Elon Musk’s devotees may never be swayed by Niedermeyer’s findings, his work has armed investors, journalists, and regulators with information that might have been glossed over amid Tesla’s constant stream of ambitious claims.

Conclusion

In summary, Edward Niedermeyer’s connection to Tesla is that of persistent watchdog and critic. Professionally, he leveraged his auto industry knowledge to examine Tesla’s claims with a critical eye, often publishing findings that contradicted the company’s official story. He has drawn attention to areas where Tesla’s execution hasn’t lived up to Musk’s grand promises – and he hasn’t hesitated to call out behavior he views as misleading or dangerous. This stance has made him a central figure among Tesla skeptics and something of a bête noire to Tesla’s fans. Through his book Ludicrous and numerous articles, Niedermeyer has influenced the public narrative about Tesla, injecting a dose of realism (and sometimes cynicism) into discussions of the company. And by actively participating in campaigns like #TeslaTakedown, he has demonstrated that he is not merely an observer but also an advocate for greater accountability from Tesla. Love him or loathe him, Ed Niedermeyer is undeniably a significant figure in the Tesla saga – a figure who has dedicated much of his career to scrutinizing the gap between Tesla’s rhetoric and its reality, and whose work continues to resonate in any serious appraisal of Elon Musk’s automotive empire.

Sources:

• Niedermeyer’s book Ludicrous: The Unvarnished Story of Tesla Motors (BenBella Books, 2019) .

• The Truth About Cars – “Tesla Death Watch” archives and commentary on Niedermeyer’s early Tesla coverage .

• Daily Kanban – Tesla Suspension Breakage: It’s Not The Crime, It’s The Coverup (June 2016) by E. Niedermeyer, exposing Tesla’s NDA in repair agreements .

• Tesla, Inc. blog – “A Grain of Salt” (June 2016), Tesla’s rebuttal to Niedermeyer’s suspension story .

• The Verge – “Tesla denies Model S suspension defects, chides journalist in blog post” (June 10, 2016) ; Decoder podcast interview with Ed Niedermeyer (Nilay Patel, Nov 2023) .

• Niedermeyer’s Bloomberg View column – “The Only Thing on Autopilot at Tesla Is the Hype Machine” (Oct 2016) .

• The Drive – “NHTSA’s Flawed Autopilot Safety Study Unmasked” by E. Niedermeyer (July 2019) .

• Current Affairs – “Exposing the Fraudulence of Elon Musk and Tesla” (Interview with E. Niedermeyer, Jan 2022) .

• The War on Cars podcast – Episode 88, “Tesla is a Fraud” (transcript, Feb 2022) .

• The Verge – “‘Tesla Takedown’ wants to hit Elon Musk where it hurts” (Feb 25, 2025) ; The Verge – “The Tesla protests are getting bigger — and rowdier” (Feb 2025) .

• Wikipedia – Entries for Edward Niedermeyer , Ludicrous: The Unvarnished Story of Tesla Motors , and TSLAQ (Tesla skeptic community) .

 

[Willinak]

Excellent! He needs to be exposed for his ruthlessness.

 

[CYBST24]

All that to say there’s no evidence that he’s behind anything wrt Tesla vandalism.

Even the TLDR version is a Waste of time….

 

[dalton108]

All that to say there’s no evidence that he’s behind anything wrt Tesla vandalism.

Even the TLDR version is a Waste of time….

Was the premise that he was behind the “vandalism?” Is that what you gleaned? How?! ?

 

[Lasttoy]

In my county. It's the poor boys in junk pickups. One guy said it cost too much. I said no. A Raptor cost more. The boys are just jealous.
They have their trucks raised 12 inches. Big tires. Loud sounds.
I freaked on out by raising mine at a light.

 

[Capsean]

I hope mine gets firebombed so that I can collect the insurance and replace it with a Cyberbeast. I regret not getting the Cyberbeast in the first place, but my foundation series is still pretty amazing.

 

[CyberZephyr]

All that to say there’s no evidence that he’s behind anything wrt Tesla vandalism.

Even the TLDR version is a Waste of time….

what about a TLDRTLDR?

 

[koolio]

What an absolute POS (Niedermeyer). Imagine going through life hating someone or a company so much that you expend so much effort spreading hate. The dude must be seriously unhappy in life (or he was abused, picked on, etc as a kid).

Sponsored