Recalls happen all the time and affect all automakers, so that's not the sticking point. Treece's point is that this particular issue for the Mazda3 and Mazda5 is not new, and in fact comes a full year after Mazda remedied the problem for models sold in Japan. If Toyota had dragged out the process in the same way, Treece argues (correctly, I think), it would have been pilloried. Why not Mazda?

He answers his own question with two responses. First, Toyota was, and is, the world's top automaker; people gun for you harder when you're No. 1. Second, Toyota's marketing, unlike that of Mazda's "zoom-zoom" performance ethos, was based squarely on safety and reliability; take that major block away, and it's a lot easier to pull the company's whole structure down.

These are both good points; however, I'd like to take it a step further and point out that there have been no deaths or major injuries related to the Mazda problem. Toyota's safety issues were first announced to the world via a fatal accident that claimed the lives of a California Highway Patrol officer and his family. We all know the saying "If it bleeds it leads," and the ensuing firestorm, while certainly helping to uncover serious concerns with some of Toyota's processes, was also the result of news media that perpetuated the story ad infinitum and used scare tactics in order to capitalize on the ratings such strategies produce. Simply put, the Mazda story just won't create that type of hype. Hence, it gets less coverage.