"Chuck Hoskin, Jr., principal chief of the Cherokee Nation, told Car and Driver in a written statement responding to our request for comment on the issue..."
Cut/Paste from the source. So let's be honest, the Chief didn't organically send a letter to C&D as your article implies, "a prominent Cherokee chief issued a surprising statement..." He was asked by a magazine trying to remain relevant in an era where fewer people are interested in a dwindling supply of modern sports cars than read print media in general. And this time, it worked. C&D got their name out into the blogosphere by being "edgy".
You have the insurance money Hagerty; you don't need to sink to this.
It doesn't feel like we're "sinking" to quote another news outlet that got a scoop. In fact it's common practice in journalism to quote other news outlets that have scooped a story before yours. Good on C/D for getting the story. Besides, what Chief Hoskin said is what is material here, not the circumstances. Most public statements are issued in response to questions or expected questions.
If you cannot distinguish the difference between asking for a statement and a statement made organically, you probably shouldn't toss around words like "journalism". That you would think this so-called scoop praiseworthy and even write your own version (and defense) confirms what I'd already thought.
So tell me, when did you stop beating your wife? Did they explain that logical fallacy to you at "journalism school"? Since when did it become the job of an auto writer to provoke a response to a question having far more to do with social-justice issues than reviewing the latest press car? Come to think of it, given that auto writers are the regular recipients of favor from auto companies... C&D is no Consumer Reports after all; how can I even be sure the question was asked organically and not in return for a weekend with the latest Jeep™ competitor?
Stay in your lane, or have the guts to write for a more socially-aware (and consequently lower-paying) publisher.
Is it only going to be acceptable to name a vehicle using numerals and maybe a random letter or two? I mean, I'm okay with doing away with stereotypical tropes and cartoonish representations (looking at you, Chief Wahoo) - as they truly can be viewed as demeaning, but as a longtime Jeep owner (including at least a couple of Cherokees), I can honestly say that I NEVER viewed the name of my vehicle as any sort of insult to anyone (any more than my Dodge Dakota). I think of Jeep as being among the best companies out there to use a tribal name as something honorable.
Now admittedly, I am not Native American, so maybe I just don't "get it". So if someone with tribal connections who is reading this wants to respond and tell me how the Jeep brand has somehow been detrimental and hurtful to the culture, I'm certainly willing to listen and take it into account.
Like we did not see this coming.
Just be grateful Pontiac is gone but they may come after me to put tape over my cars name?
I bet if they were given $5 per jeep built they would never have said a word.
In the string about leather seats and eating meat, several people discouraged wandering into "political" discussions. I'm not sure if bringing up the subject of names of places and things that might be offensive to certain people is "political", but it certainly isn't automotive related. I'm therefor gonna resist making any comments about how funny I think any of the remarks and jokes might be.
That is just it anymore. Even names being used respectfully are still being attacked. Also they attack the past that is no longer being used. That which is in the past is in the past and should be remember to not be repeated.
Also we should be wary of many groups that push this stuff. It has become a for profit industry for many. They are no more offended than anyone but they see a profit possibility and go after it.
Aaron, you must be a genuine glutton for punishment.
Your last article, on leather, brought out more unbridled venom than I’ve ever seen in Hagerty Comments. Why?
Because you dared to voice an opinion.
HEY FOLKS — LOOK at the web address! Here’s the last one:
Did you SEE it? Opinion.
By the way, I thought it was a very good and informative article.
Now this one’s bound to have you reaching for the Maalox. Maybe considering a bodyguard too.
The names associated with the Original Peoples of this continent have become hot issues of late.
I feel that to use “Native Americans” is to lend paternity to Mr. Vespucci, while “Indians” is from the earliest European explorers’ desire to reach Asia.
Both are inaccurate.
To conclude, (YAY!) it should be left to those Peoples themselves as to how (no pun) and where their Proper Names are used.