No. Far from it. But this "if I don't get an instant response" trick seems to me a cheap and shabby form of journalistic laziness. At the very least, if they don't get a response "instantly", "on Sunday", the very least they could do is follow up with a phone call on Monday and print an amendment, or better, a more balanced rewrite representing all sides fairly when they do receive a response in a more reasonable timespan. I've seldom seen any.
Besides, the court cases exist in isolation of Tesla's opinion about them. It's more a courtesy to give them time to respond than an actual requirement. Tesla's position on these cases might be interesting, but it's not required to understand them.
"Both sides" is the journalistically lazy approach, by the way. It's actually pretty rare that you get an "unbiased" view of the situation by simply quoting both sides, as we've seen in lots of other tech and science journalism.
It's interesting to me that you're more outraged about the lack of a documented timeline of callbacks to Tesla than the consistent allegations of abusive environments within Tesla. This is not the first time we've heard about this.
