While going through our inbox yesterday I received an email from an astute reader by the name Alex in which he pointed us to details of a small tiff that's developed between Mercedes and Consumer Reports. 

Apparently, in their upcoming 2007 New Car Preview, Consumer Reports found that Mercedes were among the most unreliable of all brands tested - this after sending out surveys to their 4 million subscribers (1.3 million of which responded).  Mercedes models making the list included the previous generation S-Class, the CLS and the E-Class, which held three of the total six most unreliable luxury vehicle spots; also making the list were the SL, CLK and V6 SLK models, which held three of the seven most unreliable sports car spots.

As if that weren't humorous enough, out of the 11 Mercedes models Consumer Reports tested themselves, none are recommended, with the publication citing seven as too unreliable and the other four as too new to predict.

According to David Champion, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports: "They [Mercedes] understand the problems and they are fixing some of them, but they have a long way to come."

Meanwhile, Mercedes has taken the liberty of defending themselves, albeit in a rather non-hostile way, with a spokesman for the company saying Consumer Reports ratings are "totally out of sync with what we're seeing in the mainstream research as well as our own customer satisfaction and warranty data."

My take on the situation?

Consumer Reports lost any relevance they had years ago.  Do people read Consumer Reports?  Sure they do.  They're unbiased... they don't care about making money... they just want to help consumers protect themselves.  Isn't that what their website says:

"Consumer Reports is published by Consumers Union, an expert, independent nonprofit organization whose mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect themselves. To achieve this mission, we test, inform, and protect. To maintain our independence and impartiality, CU accepts no outside advertising, no free test samples, and has no agenda other than the interests of consumers." 

And therein lies the fundamental principle of Consumer Reports:  convincing the general public that they care about nothing other than protecting us from all the big, bad corporate giants that are out to get us.  You see, if they're able to convince us of this fact, they're really in a league all by themselves.  Other publications, reviewers, media outlets - don't trust them, because they've been given items to test; they have advertisers that influence their test results.

So what are we as consumers to do?  The only thing we can do - pay for a Consumer Reports subscription, and feel their warm, loving arms embrace all of us feeble, helpless consumers.

There's only one problem - with the advent of the digital age came a new creature that made its way into the home of almost every American, and with it, an influx of information.  Known as the internet, this creature does precisely the same thing that Consumer Reports claims to do - offer unbiased, comprehensive and educational information to consumers interested in a particular item, with a key difference:  the majority of the internet's information is free.

So why am I telling you this?  Because I believe that from the ground up, Consumer Reports is selling an ideology - a false ideology - that they're out solely to help empower consumers to protect themselves, when in actuality they're no different than any other publication, meaning they're sole purpose is to sell subscriptions.

Don't believe me?

Name one other not-for-profit organization that forces those they're helping to to pay for the services rendered. Isn't it a bit like the Red Cross heading to Africa and charging the starving children for the food they're being given?

Here's the point:  If I can't trust the mission of Consumer Reports, why then should I trust the ratings it bestows upon its various test subjects?

I shouldn't.

Never mind the faulty testing practices; never mind the surveys which are arguably one of the most error-prone testing models available; I don't trust Consumer Reports reviews because, quite simply, I believe they take advantage of the same consumers they claim they're trying to protect.

Period.

Does this mean Mercedes are the most reliable car in existence?  No.  But what it does mean is that no matter what Consumer Reports said, it wouldn't matter... bad or good.  If you're buying a car - any car - do the homework and research it for yourself.  Go to online forums and talk with other owners.  Read reviews - there's plenty of free ones available. If you're filling gas and the guy next to you is filling up the same car you've been thinking about purchasing, ask him how he likes it.  Everyone's heard horror stories from a friend of a friend, but you'll be surprised what you find when you talk firsthand to the owners themselves.

Take my word for it.

But enough blaspheming the almighty Consumer Reports for one day.  For more information about the Mercedes / Consumer Reports battle, head over to CNN Money where you can check out the full details for yourself.

Thanks for the tip Alex.