"Tesla brakes failed! Tesla brakes failed!" On April 19, on the opening day of the 2021 Shanghai International Auto Show, the activist car advocated that the lady climb on the roof and sent Tesla to the hot search.
That afternoon, Tao Lin, Tesla's global vice president, responded even more to the already boiling public opinion.
"Tesla has no way to compromise. This is a necessary process for the development of new products." "I think she is also very professional, and there should be (people) behind her."...The outside world expects Tesla to come up with specific solutions to the problem. When responding to consumer concerns, Tesla’s “uncompromising” attitude surprised many people.
Subsequently, Tesla's rights protection incident attracted the attention of relevant departments, the media, consumers and other parties.
On April 21, Zhengzhou Zhengdong New Area Market Supervision Bureau ordered Tesla to provide driving data 30 minutes before the accident.
On the same day, the State Administration for Market Regulation instructed the market supervision and administration departments in Henan Province, Shanghai and other places to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers in accordance with the law.
Subsequently, the China Consumers Association also issued a document, hoping that the companies involved would actively cooperate with the investigation.
How such a "brake failure" Rashomon ended up is still unknown.
But this is not the first time Tesla has been questioned by the public because of a vehicle safety accident and the company's executives' "throwing the pot" attitude.
In recent years, with the advancement of new energy and smart technology, the internal and external extensions of automobiles as consumer goods have undergone tremendous and profound changes, but new controversies such as "Tesla brake failure" have also emerged.
Why does "smart car's worry-free technology" become a hot potato for "noisy"?
In the process of promoting new technologies, how should auto companies effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers?
These new questions that are gradually exposed, it is time to find answers.
"Brake failure" Rashomon repeatedly staged, how to restore the truth to the data
In the continued fermentation of Tesla owners' rights protection events at the Shanghai Auto Show, "data" has become the focus of the confrontation between Tesla and the owners.
According to the response of the Zhengdong New Area Market Supervision Bureau, Ms. Zhang disagreed with the third-party testing proposed by Tesla at first.
Tesla Motors Sales and Service (Zhengzhou) Co., Ltd. stated that it refused to provide relevant data because of concerns that the data would be used for hype and propaganda, causing adverse effects.
On April 21, under pressure from various parties, Tesla provided the Zhengzhou Municipal Market Supervision Administration with the original vehicle data half an hour before the incident.
On April 22, without the permission of Ms. Zhang, Tesla released the data one minute before the incident to the outside world.
The data provided by Tesla shows that when the driver stepped on the brake pedal for the last time, the vehicle speed was 118.5 kilometers per hour.
Within 2.7 seconds after the driver stepped on the brake pedal, the maximum brake master cylinder pressure was only 45.9 bar. After that, the driver increased the stepping on the brake pedal, and the brake master cylinder pressure reached 92.7 bar. The front collision warning and automatic emergency braking function were activated (the maximum brake master cylinder pressure reached 140.7bar) and played a role, reducing the amplitude of the collision. 1.8 seconds after the ABS was applied, the system recorded the occurrence of the collision.
After the driver stepped on the brake pedal, the vehicle speed continued to decrease, and before the collision, the speed decreased to 48.5 kilometers per hour.
But this data was questioned by Ms. Zhang.
"The "Road Traffic Accident Recognition" issued by the Anyang City Traffic Management Detachment held us to be fully responsible, based on the basis that'the vehicle behind should maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front that is sufficient to take emergency braking measures. The police never judged us to be speeding.' Ms. It is believed that the vehicle speed of 118.5 kilometers per hour at the time of the incident was fabricated, and the actual speed was about 60-70 kilometers.
"In fact, data only helps people restore the truth at the time. To determine the cause of the accident, it is necessary to conduct data analysis and investigation by authoritative and professional institutions. For most consumers who lack relevant professional knowledge, automobile products are made by The data provided by the car companies is also collected, stored, used and interpreted by the manufacturers, which inevitably makes people doubt.” Chen Yinjiang, deputy secretary general of the China Consumer Rights Protection Law Research Association, said bluntly that when dealing with similar accident data, car companies do not Should "be both a referee and an athlete".
“The data generated during the use of the vehicle belongs to the rights of users, and companies should seek permission from users to collect data.” Pan Helin, executive dean and professor of the Institute of Digital Economy, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, believes that after Tesla released the data in this incident , Its completeness, authenticity, and validity need to be handed over to a professional appraisal agency for analysis, rather than leaving Tesla himself to perform suggestive interpretation.
The reporter found in the interview that the data released by Tesla has also been questioned by many insiders.
Senior car critic Yan Yupeng believes that in the data table released by Tesla, the key data of the "brake pedal physical movement signal" is missing.
From the published data, it is not enough to analyze the true situation at that time.
"When the driver’s foot steps on the brake pedal, the pedal will give an electrical signal, which will be transmitted to the master cylinder of the brake, and the master cylinder will build pressure. After the pressure is built, the pressure will be transmitted to the brake calipers through the brake hose. The brake calipers will generate force. , Allowing the car to generate braking force. This process is a causal relationship.” Yan Yupeng analyzed that Tesla currently only released the data of the master cylinder, but how the driver stepped on the pedal, the depth and strength of the step did not appear in the data table. , So it is impossible to analyze causality.
Yan Yupeng suggested: "To restore the true situation of the accident, a third party is required to participate in the investigation, and Tesla also needs to provide more data."
The main person in charge is "invisible" and who is chilling with the vice of "dumping the pot"
On social media platforms such as Zhihu and Weibo, discussions on "Tesla brake failure" remain high.
In addition to concerns about data security and technical issues, Tesla's consistent arrogant attitude is where people complain the most.
According to incomplete statistics from reporters, since 2020, there have been more than ten Tesla safety accidents that have been publicly reported.
On January 4, in Linfen, Shanxi, a Tesla ran out of control and rushed into the toilet.
The driver stated that the reason for the loss of control was the inability to apply the brakes.
On March 11, when Mr. Meng, a Tesla owner in Haikou, Hainan, was parking in a parking lot, the vehicle could not stop with continuous braking, causing it to hit the guardrail.
On April 17, a Tesla car on the north of Dongjiang Avenue in Zengcheng District, Guangzhou hit a concrete wall and other vehicles while driving, and then spontaneously ignited. The accident resulted in the death of one person on board.
Incredibly, in January of this year, a Tesla Model 3 in Nanchang, Jiangxi, suddenly lost power after the second charge and could not start. Tesla staff claimed that it was caused by a sudden increase in the voltage of the State Grid.
From repeatedly citing the reason why the car cannot be stopped as "the road is too slippery" to "throwing the pot" to the national grid, Tesla's arrogant attitude has been criticized for a long time.
"In the face of vehicle safety accidents and public disputes before, Tesla's response was a bit arrogant, at least not honest enough. This also led many people to distrust the data released by Tesla this time." Zhihu legal researcher and lawyer Zhu Shirui It is believed that from the frequent exposure of vehicle safety accidents to the habit of company executives to "throw the pot" in dealing with problems, Tesla has chilled the hearts of many consumers.
“Consumers certainly have the rights to be respected. If car company executives maliciously speculate on consumers, use personal offensive remarks to insult consumers, or even cause secondary harm, consumers can ask the company to apologize.” Chen Yinjiang said, face to face. For consumers who defend their rights, companies should at least not openly doubt the motives of consumers.
In the long-term research on consumer rights protection issues, he found that if car companies really took a proactive and responsible attitude, many consumer rights protection could have been dealt with in the bud.
"Of course, consumer rights protection cannot cross the red line of the law."
After Tesla executives said that “there is no way to compromise” “she (the owner of the rights defending car) is also very professional, there should be someone behind it”, some insiders once commented that “this kind of response is very unprofessional and inconsistent. The rules of the Chinese market are in line with Tesla's consistent style."
Not long ago, Tesla CEO Elon Musk "fired" again on a conference call, accusing the media of "extremely deceptive" reports about the Tesla crash.
He said that other companies spend money on advertising and manipulating public opinion, while Tesla focuses on products.
However, when Tesla products have suffered multiple accidents and the car owners asked the company to thoroughly investigate the product safety, the head of the company, who should have personally expressed his views and reassure consumers, has repeatedly "hidden".
Another interesting detail is that in addition to repeatedly singing with boss Musk at various press conferences, he said that "China will become Tesla's largest market, and it is also the place where Tesla produces the most vehicles and has the most customers." Zhu Xiaotong, president of Latin America, has almost never expressed his views on the various doubts that Tesla has encountered in the Chinese market.
"For any company, you need to listen to its words and watch its deeds, and Tesla, which has been touted to the altar, is no exception." Zhu Shirui bluntly told reporters that "valuing consumers" cannot just be verbal, "Tesla wants If you want to develop well in China, you must first put away your arrogance and look for problems from yourself instead of throwing the pot around."
In fact, as early as February 9, the General Administration of Market Supervision and the Central Cyberspace Administration of China, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Transport, and the Fire Rescue Bureau of the Ministry of Emergency Management responded to consumers’ complaints of abnormal acceleration, battery fires, and remote vehicles. OTA and other issues jointly interviewed Tesla, requiring it to strictly abide by Chinese laws and regulations, strengthen internal management, implement the main responsibility of corporate quality and safety, effectively maintain social public safety, and effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
The China Consumers Association stated that, as a car manufacturer, companies should use professional knowledge to conduct strict self-examinations when they have relevant data.
"Large consumer goods such as automobiles must be carefully purchased. On the one hand, the reliability of the product is closely related to your own life safety; on the other hand, because consumers are naturally in a weak position, whether the brand treats consumers' rights Responsibility should be an important consideration when buying a new car." Chen Yinjiang suggested that consumers can vote with their feet, so that those manufacturers who buckle and buckle when encountering problems can pay for themselves and "pay the bill" for their irresponsibility.
Car safety is "1", and intelligence is the number of "0" behind
"Whether it is insufficient product verification or technical defects, it is a side effect of capital fanaticism and needs to be paid attention to by all parties." Pan Helin said that there is no shortcut to the development of smart cars, and the maturity of technology must first be considered. And product safety.
"In addition, the issue of data security should also be taken seriously. In the future, it is necessary to improve the management system of smart car data."
As a well-known respondent in the automotive field of Zhihu, Zhang Kangkang believes that automotive companies should strengthen the importance of automotive safety.
He cited the crash of the central control screen that was repeatedly complained by the car owner. Because the Tesla Model 3 has cancelled the traditional instrument panel and only has one main display, once the central control screen is stuck, it may show that the vehicle is hanging on the central control screen. Reverse gear, but the car is moving forward.
Or the vehicle speed has dropped, but the screen display is still stuck at 110 kilometers per hour.
"Imagine if it is on a highway, even if the 110 kilometers per hour screen is only stuck for a few seconds, it may make the driver suddenly panic and cause a serious traffic accident." Zhang Kangkang said that even if it is a small probability event, It may also harm the life and property safety of oneself and others.
Automobile safety is a systematic project of designing all aspects of software and hardware. Consumers are not "guinea pigs" to verify new technologies. "Car companies should be more in awe of user safety."
He said that by installing the "black box" of cars-EDR (Event Data Recorder), car driving data can be uploaded to third-party platforms on a regular basis, so that in the event of an accident, this data can be used to compare with data recorded by car companies , To prevent "data being deleted or modified".
Pan Helin suggested that consumers should understand that the autonomous driving mode at this stage has not yet reached commercial conditions, and that new cars on the market can only complete assisted driving.
Chen Yinjiang suggested that consumers should pay attention to retaining evidence when defending their rights. “The most powerful evidence for car rights protection is the appraisal results, such as dash cams, surveillance videos of the incident section, and accident appraisal by the traffic control and firefighting departments. Results and so on." He also reminded that the inspection and identification capabilities of third-party inspection agencies should be strengthened. "When automotive technology develops rapidly, the third-party inspection capabilities and the management level of relevant departments must keep up with this pace."
When the argument that "data determines experience, software defines cars" has become the mainstream view of the industry, "safety" is still the highest priority for the development of the automotive industry.
Car companies should not shirk their bucks when encountering safety problems, and truly respect Chinese consumers in terms of actions.
Don't let the dust of car companies turn into a mountain on consumers' heads.
For consumers, driving safety is always a "1", and smart and fast are followed by several "0"s.
Without the "1" of "security", no amount of "0" is useful.
Even Musk, who is aspiring to "migrate to Mars", must recognize this.
China Youth Daily·China Youth Daily reporter Cheng Honghe and Xu Yajie Source: China Youth DailyKeywords: