"superdave847" (superdave847)
01/18/2015 at 04:43 • Filed to: Detroit
1
0|
"superdave847" (superdave847)
01/18/2015 at 04:43 • Filed to: Detroit | 1
| 0 |
I still meander over to the New York Times automobile section out of habit, even though these days the content is drying up. So, my attention was picked by an article titled, " !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ", which featured a promising photograph of a classic Mustang that clearly needs only a little TLC. "Sweet," I thought "What a great feature!" as I clicked the link expecting first year Studabaker Avantis, rare 1952 Chevy Fleetline coupes, and surely a few 1969 "Judge" GTOs. At the minimum, this was going to be the urban equivalent of rare !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , right?
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Alas, not to be.
For reasons completely unknown to me, the New York Times drove around Detroit and photographed 80's model Lincoln Town Cars, a Ford 250 from the 1980s, a pink Impala from the 1990s, and I believe a Chevrolet Astro van. Or wait, could that be a GMC Safari?
I'm a Chicago native who lives in St. Louis, and I've been to most American cities—you can find malaise era cars in disrepair in almost every American city. But, given the exploitive history of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! in Detroit, this article is hot garbage . And even more damning, it is downright boring. Slow clap , NYT auto section, remember that Detroit has already out lived you.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!