YouTuber Mark Rober, known for his quirky science experiments and viral videos, is facing major backlash after releasing a video titled “Can You Fool a Self-Driving Car?”—a piece many are calling misleading and deceptive.
The video, which racked up over 9 million views in 24 hours, compares Tesla’s basic Autopilot system with Luminar’s LiDAR technology. But the real controversy? Rober never discloses that the video seemingly doubles as a promotion for Luminar, a company struggling with a 96% stock drop over the past five years. Also, Full Self-Driving (FSD) was never used in the video.
Misleading Title, Misleading Test
Right off the bat, the video’s title misleads viewers. It suggests that Tesla’s FSD is under scrutiny, when in fact, Rober only tested Tesla’s basic Autopilot—a simpler feature designed as advanced cruise control, not as full autonomous driving. While Rober briefly mentions this distinction nine minutes into the video, the damage is done by then.
The Tesla community, known for being fiercely protective of the company’s reputation, has slammed the video as clickbait and misinformation. Critics say Rober intentionally conflated Autopilot with FSD to make Tesla look bad and generate more engagement.
“FSD and Autopilot are completely different software stacks. FSD would have likely performed much better in these tests,” said Brandon Smith on X. “It’s a low, shady practice to bait viewers with misinformation, especially when it confuses potential buyers.”
Suspicious Disengagement and Editing
The controversy deepened when Rober posted the “raw footage” of his Tesla hitting a cartoon cut-out wall on Sunday evening. Oddly, the footage shows Autopilot disengaging 17 frames before impact—despite Rober claiming his feet were off the pedals. Sharp-eyed viewers also noticed that Rober engaged Autopilot much later in the raw footage compared to the original video, leading many to believe the video was carefully staged.
Here is the raw footage of my Tesla going through the wall. Not sure why it disengages 17 frames before hitting the wall but my feet weren’t touching the brake or gas. pic.twitter.com/ddmeyqO3ww
— Mark Rober (@MarkRober) March 17, 2025
“In the YouTube video, Autopilot was engaged at 39 mph from a farther distance,” one user noted. “But in the crash footage, it was engaged at 42 mph from much closer. That’s not just a coincidence.”
Worse still, Autopilot’s disengagement timing—just seconds before impact—has some questioning whether the test was intentionally manipulated to make Tesla look worse.
“So I can definitely say for the first time in the history of the world, Tesla’s optical camera system absolutely smashed through a fake wall, without even a slight tab on the brakes,” says Rober confidently in his misleading video.
Conflict of Interest with Luminar?
Adding to the controversy, Luminar’s branding is plastered across the video. Employees in Luminar shirts, company stickers on vehicles, and favorable comparisons to their LiDAR tech dominate the visuals. The kicker? Luminar even linked the video on its corporate website, which many say proves the video was essentially a covert advertisement for their struggling business.
“Mark says, ‘LiDAR is perfect. Tesla is 3 for 5.’ That sounds like it came straight out of a Luminar sales pitch,” said Smith. “It reeks of conflict of interest. Did Luminar approach Mark to make this video? Did Mark ever reach out to Tesla for a fair test? The outcome of this video was decided before it ever began.”
$TSLA
Oh my god. They're promoting 'Luminar LiDAR' tested by Mark Roberts, a video YouTuber that went viral today. Yes they were sponsors. Bad videos spreading misinformation. Unjust.* Luminar LiDAR tested by former NASA/Apple engineer & current YouTuber Mark Rober. https://t.co/KiILsvANsf pic.twitter.com/uZX87DJXJ4
— Tsla Chan (@Tslachan) March 16, 2025
Engineering Fake Problems for Clicks
Rober’s “experiments” were also criticized for being unrealistic and absurd. His fog and rain tests? Completely irrelevant. “If you can’t see through the fog, you wouldn’t be driving. It’s ridiculous to suggest otherwise,” Smith said. The cartoon wall cut-outs used in the test? Clearly staged to ensure a dramatic failure from Tesla.
“This was a test designed for Tesla to fail,” said one commenter. “It’s sad to see Rober prioritize sensationalism over science.”
Backlash and Calls for Accountability
The backlash has been swift. Some fans are canceling their Crunch Labs subscriptions—the science kit company Rober owns—and expressing disappointment in his credibility.
This is the end of Mark Rober’s reputation, said people on X, saying he sold out for clicks and cash.
There are even suggestions that Tesla could sue Rober under the Lanham Act for false advertising and misleading an audience, which requires only proof of an attempt to deceive viewers—not actual damages.
“This isn’t about loving Tesla,” said Smith. “It’s about being tired of false narratives that mislead the public and hurt innovation.”
The bottom line? Rober’s attempt to undermine Tesla’s technology—while seemingly promoting Luminar’s struggling business—has backfired spectacularly. What started as a science video has now turned into a cautionary tale of misleading content, undisclosed sponsorships, and the cost of selling out credibility for clicks.
For a man who claims to be a “friend of science,” this was anything but scientific.
