If you count an automotive journalist whose face was significantly damaged in a rollover accident[1] "the auto industry," sure. And maybe you do, his magazine ran ads from auto companies, but it's a pretty cold dismissal on your part. Possibly an incorrect one as well-- considering that he refused to back down from statements that angered various automotive corporations at the cost of ad revenue.
The only reference to this that I can find is an article from just a few years ago in which Davis argues that Nader's focus on the Corvair had the effect of delaying the auto industry shift to more aerodynamic cars with front-wheel drives.
For some reason your comments are coming across with a lot of hostility. I'm not sure why, but my knowledge of Nader's book comes from having read about it when I was younger and took an interest in the topic. I'm happy to be proven wrong about the attempt by the auto industry to smear Nader - and his success at proving this attempt and defending his thesis - but I'm confused about why this discussion is starting to feel personal.
I'm not trying to prove you wrong about the auto-industry trying to smear Nader. I'm not arguing that Nader was wrong or deserved criticism. I was reacting to your dismissive flourish "Translation:" bit.
