Responding to the 325-page Valukas report, which cited “incompetence” and “a plodding corporate culture” as reasons for the Cobalt ignition switch defect, General Motors CEO Mary Barra said the company will embrace a culture of change, including its approach to building automobiles.
“Clearly, General Motors needs to change the way it has been doing things,” said Ms. Barra, “and one of the biggest changes is that we need to stop making shitty cars.”
Ms. Barra, speaking to journalists through an interpreter, said that shitty cars have been a long-standing tradition at General Motors.
“Shitty cars have been a long-standing tradition at General Motors,” she said. “And I’m not just talking about the 1970s and the 1980s and the 1990s, when we focused almost exclusively shitty cars. Most of our vehicles have had some element of shit to them, like the cheesy-ass interior on the Corvette ZR1 or the God-awful seats in the Cadillac CTS-V. Sixty years ago, when we introduced the original Corvette, we fitted it with an ancient six-cylinder engine and a two-speed automatic. Seriously, how fucked up was that? Only a company with a serious commitment to shitty cars would do something so bone-headed.”
General Motors corporate historian Gil Dustifartz told Autoblopnik that General Motors has a long history of shitty cars, dating back to before the corporation was formed.
“Back in its day, the Curved-Dash Oldsmobile was known as the Squeaky-Dash Oldsmobile,” he said. “And let’s not forget that Chevrolet was started by a French guy, and no one knows more about shitty cars than the French. Yes, you could say that shitty cars are part of General Motors’ corporate DNA.”
UAW president Bobk Ing, whose name has been changed to prevent retaliation against Autoblopnik and its staff, said the union would cooperate fully with GM’s plans to stop making shitty cars.
“Obviously, this is a sad moment for us,” Ing told a pert young Autoblopnik intern. “The UAW has always taken pride in its contributions to GM’s shitty cars. Frankly, there’s no feeling quite like banging a trim piece on slightly crooked because your supervisor gave you the stink-eye in the lunchroom. But we’re committed to the future of this company, and if Mary wants to stop building shitty cars, then the union will cooperate fully, at least until our next contract negotiation or the next time the vending machine at the Flint plant runs out of peanut M&Ms, whichever comes first.”
A General Motors representative announced today that the company is issuing recalls for every single vehicle they have ever produced.
“The company is issuing recalls for every single vehicle we have ever produced,” said General Motors spokesrecaller Shag Belch.
Belch said the reasons for the recalls vary from model to model, and include faulty ignition switches (2003-2011 Pontiac G5), cracked axle shafts (2011-2013 Chevrolet Cruze), making their owners look like douchebags with no taste (2001-2006 Chevrolet Avalanche), and what Belch described as “just being sort of crappy” (every GM vehicle designed between 1993 and 2001).
“Some vehicles have no specific defects that we need to recall, but I’m sure we’ll find something,” said Belch.
Clint Meat-Hankee, president of the not-for-profit Union for Corporate Oversight and Communal Safety, said his organization was very pleased with the impending GM recalls.
“Our organization is very pleased with the impending GM recalls,” she said at a UCOCS press conference. “These General Motors vehicles are inherently flawed and dangerous death traps that are maiming and killing innocent people every second of every minute of every hour of every day.”
Meat-Hankee demonstrated what he called “serious safety flaws” in a Buick Enclave he had recently purchased for his wife and expensed to the organization.
“This vehicle has a device called an ‘accelerator pedal’ positioned right on the floor, dangerously close to the driver’s feet,” she explained to the pair of journalists who attended the press conference. “A person who didn’t know how a car works could accidentally step on this innocent-looking protrusion and send the car careening into a nursery school full of nuns.”
Meat-Hankee pointed out the turn signal stalk as yet another a potential hazard.
“If you had never seen a car before and didn’t know how to get into one properly, this could potentially go right up your rectum, causing extensive and embarrassing injury, not to mention making you the butt of jokes from your co-workers for weeks, not that I would know this from personal experience,” he said. “And yet there are no instructions or warning stickers on the car to alert you to this sad and painful end.” He then added, “Why are you giggling?”
Meat-Hankee went on to tell the one remaining journalist that these two hazards and dozens of others exist in nearly every car ever produced by General Motors.
“Clearly, issues like this would never happen in a quality-built Japanese car like a Toyota Camry,” he said, and then added, “Oh, wait.”
© Autoblopnik — I swear I didn’t steal this idea from SniffPetrol, but you should read this
General Motors and Toyota today unveiled a new jointly-developed safety car concept, which they call the Jointly Developed Safety Car Concept.
“The GM-Toyota Jointly Developed Safety Car Concept, or GMTDJSCC for short, is a radical new approach to vehicle safety that will end all these ridiculous lawsuits once and for all,” said GM-Toyota Joint Head of Joint Safety Engineering, Sy Ftee.
At a press conference in Naperville, Illinois, Ftee explained the highlights of the concept vehicle.
“The SCCGDJTM has no ignition switch that can accidentally turn off and no floor mats to catch the accelerator pedal,” he told the assembled journalists. “It has no airbags that will fail to deploy, no seats to slide off, no dash to get caught under, no glass to shatter and put your eye out, no brakes to fail, no tires to blow out, no engine to catch fire, and no steering column to crush your rib cage. It weighs sixteen tons, so you can’t even pick it up and accidentally drop it on your toe. Basically, there is no way anyone could ever sue us based on anything that happened to them in, on or around the JSDCTMCG.”
The press conference was ended prematurely after someone cut their finger on one of the TMGCCSJD’s exposed metal edges.
General Motors today announced that Chevrolet will announce a new diesel-powered Malibu wagon at next week’s New York Autonouncement Show.
“This is an effort to improve critical opinion of the Chevrolet Malibu among automotive influencers,” announced Chevrolet spokesannouncer Randy Dog. “The 2013 Malibu was poorly received by the press, and the updates we made for 2014 haven’t helped. So we’re going for broke. We’ve yet to meet an auto writer or blog commenter who doesn’t love a diesel wagon.”
The Malibu TDZ Diesel Sport Diesel Wagon will be powered by a 2.2 liter turbodiesel developing 150 horsepower and 460 lb-ft of torque.
“The Malibu Sportdiesel Wagon’s diesel engine was conceived and designed in Europe,” announced Dog. “It’s built in our GM European Diesel Plant in Europe, then shipped to Orion Township where the diesel-powered Malibu Dieselsport will be assembled. We then send the engine back to Europe to be inspected by a European guy who lives in Europe, then it returns to Michigan once more to be installed in the car. Anyone who says this isn’t a true European diesel can kiss my European ass.”
Asked of the addition of a diesel-powered wagon to the Malibu lineup was a move to pander to the press rather than provide a vehicle actually demanded by buyers, Dog announced, “You’re damn right we’re pandering to the press. It works for BMW and now we’re going to make it work for General Motors. Seriously, a 4-series with four doors and a hatchback? Who else but an underpaid and overpampered car-magazine hack would want one of those?”
The diesel-powered Malibu Sportdiesel Wagonsport wagon will come exclusively with a six-speed manual transmission, rear-wheel-drive, and hydraulic power steering. Fuel economy estimates have not been calculated, but Dog announced that they will be at least twenty percent lower than the car is actually capable of achieving, so that auto writers can point to their better-than-EPA figures as proof of how stupid the American public is for not embracing diesels.
Dog announced that the diesel wagon is expected to account for roughly 0.004% of 2015 Malibu sales, or about eight cars in total, six of which will be provided as long-term loaners to various car magazines.
“We’re very excited,” announced an excited Dog. “This will be the first time the Malibu has been available as a wagon with a diesel engine.” When Autoblopnik pointed out that the Malibu wagon was offered with an Oldsmobile diesel in 1982 and 1983, Dog announced, “Yes, but we like to pretend that never happened,” and then added, “Nerd.”
Days after General Motors mysteriously ordered dealers to stop selling certain versions of the Chevrolet Cruze, the formerly-Government-financed company finally issued an explanation for the unusual directive.
“Basically, we stopped selling the Cruze because it’s not a very good car,” said GM spokestopper Teddy Ragout. “It was two years out of date when we introduced in 2010, and it’s not exactly aging gracefully. Our new CEO said we’ve entered a new era of transparency, and the transparent truth is that our customers would be better off buying a Honda Civic.”
GM’s sales-stopping directive only affects Cruzes equipped with the 1.4 liter turbocharged engine.
“The 1.8 liter Cruze is still a good deal,” Ragout explained. “But $1,300 extra for an engine that produces the same amount of horsepower and saves you maybe three bucks a month in gas? No way, man. No friggin’ way.”
Asked if there were any other circumstances leading to the cessation of sales, Ragout says “Of course not. The only reason we’re pulling the Cruze off of the showroom floor is because we don’t like it very much.” He paused, then added, “That, and the slight possibility that the right-hand axle shaft could short-circuit the ignition switch and set the car on fire.”
General Motors is preparing for Mary Barra to take over as the first female CEO in the company’s 106-year history.
“There’s this perception that General Motors is run by boring old white men in boring gray suits,” said General Motors spokesuit Teddy “Free” Rhadical. “Now the world will see General Motors being run by a woman in a skirt. And let me tell you, when Mary wears a skirt, it sure as hell ain’t boring! High five! You know what I’m talkin’ about!”
Current CEO Dan Ackerson told Autoblopnik he firmly believes that Barra is the woman who is most qualified to run GM.
“Mary has a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, an MBA from Stanford, and a caboose that could make the Pope stay home from mass,” he said. “Let’s just say she’s perfect for the head position! Get it? Head position? Yeah, baby! Lemmie tell you, the Virgin Mary, she ain’t!”
Cardigan immediately denied that Ackerson’s comments implied any form of personal relationship between Barra and Ackerson.
“Listen, even if Dan did nail that tail — and I’m not in any way saying he did, but could you blame him for trying? — the fact is you cannot sleep your way to the top of General Motors. Just ask Carlos Tavares.”
“Truth is, there’s never been a better time to have a gal run General Motors,” Ackerson said. “We’ve redesigned the bulk of our most significant vehicles, and we have enough new product in the pipeline to carry us through 2016. The government loans are just about repaid and the ledger looks good. We can coast for the next couple of years while the little lady takes the helm. Of course, once we get to the point where we need to do some heavy lifting, we’ll give her a golden pat on the ass and put a man back in charge.”
UPDATE: Um, yeah, so… the purpose of this article was to point out the inherent sexism in an industry which is chock full of talented female executives and has been for some years, and yet is only just now getting around to putting one in charge. A few people saw it as sexist and misogynistic, and a bunch more saw it in poor taste. Apologies to all who found it offensive. — Otto
General Motors today issued what it called “a heartfelt apology to our customers, employees, shareholders, dealers and supporters throughout the country and around the world.”
“We wish to express our depest regrets,” said CEO Dan Ackerman in a written statement. “We understand the trust you put in our Corporation and our products, and we have violated that trust. We take full responsibility and are genuinely sorry for any harm or upset that has been caused.”
“The days of shying away from things like this are long past us,” Teddy Cardigan, GM’s VP of public relations, told Autoblopnik. “When a situation occurs, we need to stand up and say ‘We acknowledge this, we own this, and here’s what were going to do to remedy the situation.'”
In his statement, Ackerson said that the company was taking “a serious look at all levels of the company” to find “the root cause”.
We’re not looking for a scapegoat,” Ackerson wrote. “We need to change our culture, not just our personnel, to make sure this doesn’t happen ever again.”
Other Detroit automakers said they are carefully watching the reaction to General Motors’ apology. Ford spokesapologist Sid Deet said he thought General Motors was “doing the right thing,” and that his company was prepared to follow suit with an apology of their own if need be. Chrysler told Autoblopnik that they are also prepared to apologize, just not to NHTSA. Toyota, a company with a great deal of apology experience, said they were considering their own apology, while a Hyundai representative said “We’ll do whatever Toyota does, except for making floor mats that step on the accelerator by themselves.”
Autoblopnik made several inquiries to General Motors to find out what exactly they were apologizing for, but our calls and emails were not returned.