By using the word "sharing," Isada and host Honda Cars Philippines were apparently employing a calculated move, careful not to offend the members of the automotive beat media in attendance. After all, some of those present have been at this trade for quite some time, earning their keep by evaluating vehicles and covering the auto industry in general for about a decade or so already.
Definitely, nobody would want any "how-to" terms to sneak in, and "sharing" was decidedly a more polite – if not palatable – choice of word. Of course, by tirelessly establishing Isada’s credentials and extensive motorsports experience, everybody is at the same time constantly reminded that the speaker knows whereof he speaks.
Held last week, the event was a presentation to the media of Honda’s newest and much talked-about offering, the latest CR-V. Actually, this new model was already introduced to the press (and the market) more than two weeks ago.
In a marketing move unheard of in recent times, the new model is priced by the company to be significantly cheaper than the one it replaces. Now with this latest media presentation, Honda is again not taking the typical beaten route by tackling the technical aspects of its new vehicle more detailed than usual, replacing the pomp and pageantry that often define new-vehicle press launches.
But woven in with the tech talk is the aforementioned "sharing" of how vehicle evaluations are conducted. And here, nobody would again want the term "lecture" to sneak in. By combining the technical presentation with the vehicle evaluation "sharing," Honda was able to precisely steer the direction of the discussion where it wants to go. Like in any good legal argument, Honda – through Isada – presented a strong and compelling case in favor of the new CR-V. Isada tackled every component and feature of the new vehicle in great detail, explaining at length its technical aspects, and merging it with his own personal preference in vehicle design and engineering. In so doing, Honda was able to position its new product inside a cocoon, sheltered by its purported technical merits, which are endorsed by expert opinion no less.
As such, from hereon one’s review – and especially, criticism – of the new CR-V should be taken from a highly technical point of view. Anything less would apparently be a weak argument. A strong, expert opinion wouldn’t hurt as well. Admittedly, a significant part of the discussion may be way over the heads of some members of the press present – people who may not even be able to distinguish a crankshaft from a camshaft. So indeed, the entire exercise is educational.
But for those who may actually have an actual understanding of the tech talk and is capable of spewing their own share of technospeak through articles, another question is involved. Would readers – to whom writers write their articles for in the first place, and which include laymen, consumers, casual browsers and experts alike – actually want all these tech stuff and accompanying jargon to go with their morning cup of coffee?