I tested out Automotive News new artificial-intelligence research tool called AutoNews Answers and found it to be . . . underwhelming. All it does is summarize the news and opinion pieces published by the trade journal during the last few years. However, the tool is not very helpful if you are doing auto history research.
In addition, the tool isn’t all that much better if you are asking analytically challenging questions about contemporary issues. And if you inquire about the journalistic rigor of Automotive News, don’t expect much of a response.
To be fair, AutoNews Answers does have one particularly useful feature: It can spit out bibliographies. That can be helpful because the website’s “Find” feature is so clunky that I have usually used Google instead.
How far back does the searchable archives go? AutoNews Answers would not give me a specific answer beyond saying that it mostly included content from 2025 and 2026. That’s not very far, which arguably limits the tool’s ability to address even relatively recent industry trends.
When asking questions, the key thing to remember is that your answers will only be as good as previous content in Automotive News. So if the original coverage was incomplete or biased, don’t expect AutoNews Answers to be any different.
History questions don’t get more than generic answers
To test out how the tool deals with postwar automotive topics I asked questions such as, “Why did General Motors lose more market share in the 1980s even though it was able to finance a much more elaborate downsizing of its passenger-car lineup than its domestic rivals?”
Here’s the answer: “The search results don’t contain historical coverage of GM’s 1980s market share decline and downsizing strategy. Let me search with different keywords focused on that specific era. I don’t have access to Automotive News coverage that analyzes GM’s 1980s market share decline and the relationship between its downsizing strategy and competitive losses during that era. The search results focus on recent China operations and modern EV competition, not the historical 1980s period you’re asking about.”
Not a satisfying answer, so how about: “Could American Motors have avoided a tie-up with Renault in the late-1970s?” Once again the search results stated that it did not have access to historical coverage so it used “different keywords targeting AMC’s financial and competitive challenges in that era.” However, this time it took a stab at an answer: “AMC’s core problem was scale. . . . The fundamental issue was that AMC needed either massive capital infusion, a merger with a stronger domestic competitor, or a foreign partnership. By the late 1970s, when Renault arrived, those options had largely closed.”
This answer isn’t “wrong” per se but it reflects a vague-and-squishy conventional wisdom. Would it have been analytically stronger if the tool could draw upon Automotive News’ archives from that era?
Okay, then how well are current topics covered?
Let’s turn to questions that I would think the leading automotive trade journal in the United States would consider burning issues. For example, “Has Donald Trump’s second term been a net plus for the U.S. automotive industry or would Kamala Harris have been better?”
The following answer says a lot about the lack of robust coverage: “Trump’s second term has imposed substantial near-term costs on the U.S. automotive industry, though the counterfactual comparison to Harris’s platform remains speculative given the absence of direct policy implementation data,” the tool stated.
“The search results contain no coverage of Harris’s specific automotive or EV policy platform, making a direct comparison impossible. The archive does not include analysis of what Harris would have done differently on tariffs, EV incentives, or trade policy had she won the election.”
Also see ‘Automotive News tiptoes around a potentially huge conflict of interest’
Answers to more product-focused questions were stronger. As a case in point, “Have U.S. automakers made a strategic mistake by largely abandoning the low-priced end of the market?”
The tool answered “yes” — and “that threatens long-term brand loyalty and market share as the industry has priced itself out of reach for middle-class buyers. The retreat from affordable vehicles has severed a generational pathway that historically sustained the industry.”
This is a decent analysis that is contradicted by an included quote from the Automotive News editorial board: “There are no quick fixes available to address new-vehicle affordability; if there were, they would have been implemented.”
Will this tool become the Magic 8 Ball for the industry?
If AI can be used for mental health counseling then it would seem inevitable that folks would start asking it for management or investment advice.
As a case in point: “Should Stellantis discontinue the Chrysler brand?” Answer: “Stellantis should not discontinue the Chrysler brand despite its anemic product lineup and weak sales performance. The brand has demonstrated surprising resilience and possesses distinct market positioning that competitors cannot easily replicate—but only if Stellantis commits to the product investment it has so far withheld.”
Also see ‘Automotive News staff struggle to transcend paper’s checkered past’
Or how about: “What are the odds of Rivian surviving as an independent automaker?” Answer: “Rivian’s odds of surviving as an independent automaker are poor and deteriorating rapidly. The company faces a cash burn crisis, collapsing regulatory credit revenue, and a make-or-break product launch that must succeed at unprecedented scale — all while competing against Tesla, legacy automakers, and Chinese EV makers in a market that has turned hostile to EVs.”
Finally, let’s ask: “Should Ford have not discontinued the Escape?” Answer: No — “The decision sacrifices a high-volume, profitable product with proven customer loyalty to retool a plant for an uncertain EV future, creating an affordability crisis that threatens dealer profitability and brand loyalty at a critical moment when the industry is facing a customer retention crisis.”
How well does the tool address media criticisms?
I plugged in a number of questions that assessed the journalistic rigor of the publication. For example, “Does the news reporting of Automotive News suffer from lack of journalistic depth and independence?”
“Based on the available coverage in the Automotive News archive, I cannot provide a substantive answer to your question about whether automotive news reporting suffers from lack of journalistic depth and independence. The archive does not contain reporting or analysis that examines the editorial quality, conflicts of interest, or independence of the automotive journalism industry itself.”
One of the curious aspects of the tool is that sometimes when I asked an additional question it would integrate the answer with a second take on a previous question. Here’s an example:
“The most significant gap in automotive journalism is the absence of meta-journalism — reporting that examines the automotive press itself. There is no coverage of:
- Whether advertising relationships influence editorial decisions
- How automotive journalists navigate conflicts of interest when covering major advertisers
- Whether the consolidation of automotive media (most major outlets are owned by Crain Communications or similar large publishers) affects editorial independence
- How automotive journalists are trained to handle conflicts of interest
- Whether automotive media outlets have published corrections or retractions due to advertiser pressure
“The archive contains opinion columns criticizing automakers and dealers and letters to the editor criticizing the auto retail industry. This suggests some editorial independence. However, the absence of critical examination of automotive journalism itself suggests either that the industry does not scrutinize itself, or that such scrutiny is not published.”
So how will I use this tool?
I don’t see myself using AutoNews Answers for more than trying to get a quick bibliography of recent stories on a given topic. I certainly wouldn’t use this to develop editorial content. The whole point of Indie Auto is to offer alternative perspectives rather than an echo chamber of conventional wisdom.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- AutoNews Answers; 2026. Miscellaneous queries. Automotive News. Accessed March 17.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcarbrochures.org: Chevrolet Citation (1980)
Be the first to comment