Investor's Corner
Tesla’s defense of workers’ safety triggers fiery Twitter rebuttal from Reveal
Tesla’s blog post calling out Reveal of intentionally painting a false picture of the company’s safety policies has triggered a fiery Twitter response from the publication on Tuesday. In an extensive article, Reveal alleged that the electric car maker is neglecting workers safety and intentionally mislabeling some of its employees’ injuries to make its facilities appear safer.
Citing former employees of the company and an executive from Worksafe, an organization that has clashed with Tesla in the past, Reveal‘s article suggested that the Elon Musk-led company is operating its facilities in a dangerous, haphazard fashion. According to the publication, much of the dangers that workers face could be blamed on management, especially CEO Elon Musk. The report claimed, for example, that Musk and Tesla’s management allowed the factory floor to have very little hazard markings for dangerous areas because “Elon does not like the color yellow.”
The Reveal article prompted a response from Tesla, which denied the allegations in the report. The Elon Musk-led company went a step further as well, stating that the piece was an “ideologically motivated attack by an extremist organization working directly with union supporters to create a calculated disinformation campaign against Tesla.”
Reveal did not take Tesla’s defense lying down. In a series of tweets on Tuesday, the publication reaffirmed the accuracy of its report. The two reporters who wrote the article have also announced that they will be doing a Reddit AMA to answer questions about their investigation into the electric car maker. Reveal’s tweetstorm could be accessed here, though we have compiled them for easier reading below.
So before yesterday’s investigation came out, Tesla released a statement accusing us of being an “extremist organization” who’s “working directly with union supporters to create a calculated disinformation campaign.” A LOT to unpack right there. So let’s do it.
First of all, there’s zero “disinformation” in this story. The story is based on internal company documents, interviews with five former members of the Tesla safety team and dozens of other current and former employees as well as medical records of injured workers, OSHA records, 911 calls and Tesla’s own injury logs.
That information shows Tesla failed to report some of its serious injuries on legally mandated reports. This makes the company’s injury numbers look better than they actually are.
Case in point: Tarik Logan.
6/ How do we know this? We got his medical records. And the text messages he sent his mom. pic.twitter.com/ciZNJBNwp7
— Reveal (@reveal) April 17, 2018
On to this accusation of “working directly with union supporters”: Our story was done completely independent of any unionization efforts. Some of the workers we talked to supported the union, but many had no involvement – including Tesla’s own former safety experts.
On to those emails: Here’s one from Justine White, the factory’s safety lead, to Elon Musk’s chief of staff on 12/21/16. “I know what can keep a person up at night regarding safety,” she wrote. “I must tell you that I can’t sleep here at Tesla.”
When White resigned, she warned that Musk’s preferences for the color yellow, and other aesthetic tastes, were creating an unsafe workplace. The reporters didn’t rely on just one source for these claims. They spoke with five former safety team members, and they all told the same fundamental concerns.
9/ When White resigned, she warned that Musk’s preferences for the color yellow, and other aesthetic tastes, were creating an unsafe workplace. pic.twitter.com/CPIrhpnHnc
— Reveal (@reveal) April 17, 2018
In its statement, Tesla complained about us visiting employees at their homes unannounced. We didn’t do that, though we do have to do it for some stories. They also complained about us getting in touch with employees on social media. That’s what fair reporters do. They go try to talk to as many people as possible to understand the true story.
Tesla is yet to respond to Reveal’s fiery response.
Back in February, Tesla VP for Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Laurie Shelby published a blog post outlining the company’s target of becoming the safest car factory in the world. Shelby noted that workers safety in an automotive production line usually comes down to a combination of common sense, a culture that values safety, the rollout of proactive preventive measures, and a management that listens to its employees. According to the 25-year veteran in the EHS field, Tesla already exhibited many of these attributes even before she joined the company in October 2017.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Electric vehicle maker Lucid Group has denied rumors of an imminent bankruptcy after a report from this morning sent the stock on a dramatic drop on Wall Street, seeing losses of more than 40 percent during trading hours.
Lucid’s Director of Communications, Nick Twork, responded to the report from Eletric-Vehicles.com, which stated the company’s restructuring advisor, AlixPartners, was asked to review two decisions: taking Lucid shares private or filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
The report also claims AlixPartners told the Lucid board to “concentrate on Gravity production while improving its quality, and to temporarily hold back the Lucid Air, the sedan that has defined the company since its launch.”
Twork said:
$LCID The rumors are completely false. The company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special Board committee to explore the scenarios reported today. Our focus is…
— Nick Twork (@ntwork) July 14, 2026
Shares rebounded after the response to the report, halving its losses as the trading day neared 3 p.m. Eastern.
Lucid has struggled to get its sales off the ground and into more respectable numbers, but the company is in its early years, when things are hard to begin with. It is also backed by several notable investors, including the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF), which has nearly limitless money and likely would not ditch an investment of this size so soon.
Lucid shares were down just 14 percent at the time of publication, a far cry from the 55 percent its losses topped out at during the day.
Tesla enters two new markets on two different continents in one week
SpaceX announces new Starship 13 test flight target date
