OK, which one of you is George Lundskow? PMC?
Honestly this paper reads more like a forum post than any form of academic work.
- Unsubstantiated claim that Toyota has had inferior quality since a particular date (2003).
- Random bitch list about Toyota quality issues with no comparisons to other manufacturers
- Claim that Toyota engages in "propaganda" while being completely uncritical about automotive marketing as a whole.
- Vague handwaving about "heritage" (yawn)
- Strawman argument about "staunch Toyota devotees", with no data about the Toyota customer base. This a fluffed-up version of "fanboi" trolling
- Long discussion of "narcissism" in relationship to green buyers, but not to people who buy say humungous SUVs or muscle cars or anything else. No substantiation that any one customer group is more narcissist than any other.
One big problem with all these sorts of arguments on a GM site is that GM was and is a mass-marketing machine that sold half the cars in America. This wasn't possible without using "propaganda" and every other sort of marketing technique to appeal to people's narcissistic and every other psychological motivation. It isn't possible to claim moral superiority when Toyota beat GM at it's own game.
How many times have people said things like "Toyota buyers are sheeples" and then in the next post "My granddaddy and my daddy were Chevy Men". Attempts to be critical of one customer group's motivations here create a huge irony gap, you GM stooges
