# data.attributes.title
The Smart ForTwo is apparently the most beautiful car of the decade

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
The Smart ForTwo is apparently the most beautiful car of the decade | Top Gear

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
Only, it obviously isn’t. Don’t share fake news, kids

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
The Smart ForTwo is apparently the most beautiful car of the decade

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
Only, it obviously isn’t. Don’t share fake news, kids

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
The Smart ForTwo is apparently the most beautiful car of the decade

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
Only, it obviously isn’t. Don’t share fake news, kids

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
The Smart ForTwo is apparently the most beautiful car of the decade

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
The Smart ForTwo is apparently the most beautiful car of the decade

# data.attributes.metatag[].attributes.content
Only, it obviously isn’t. Don’t share fake news, kids

# data.attributes.body.value
We live in curious times. Rubbish is the new good. They say there's no such thing as bad publicity, and 2019 is doing its very best to prove it.

And look, we’re not saying that a publicity-hungry car-buying website would deliberately identify one of the least attractive cars of the decade, then pump out a press release with a retro-fitted nonsense backstory about ‘algorithms’ and ‘golden ratios’, solely to get everyone to disagree, thus getting said publicity-hungry car-buying website’s name out there.

That would clearly be unfair. What we’re saying is, if you were a publicity-hungry car-buying website wanting to get your name out there any which way, well, identifying one of the least attractive cars of the decade, then pumping out a press release etc etc, yeah, there's a good chance you'd hook a marginally less publicity-hungry car site like, say, this one.

So, anyhow. A car-buying site – whose name has unfortunately just slipped our mind, as does tend to happen in these situations – believes it has mathematical proof that Smart’s bug-eyed city runabout is the most beautiful car of this decade.

According to this press release in front of us, "the intricately designed Smart ForTwo Cabrio was found to take the top spot when it comes to scientifically perfect beauty, being 98.83 per cent accurate to the golden ratio… a famous algebraic equation that has been in use since 300BC."

To which Top Gear respectfully replies, if your famous algebraic equation reckons the Smart ForTwo Cabrio is the hottest of the lot, probably time to recheck your famous algebraic equation.

Actually, scrap that. In fact, Top Gear respectfully replies, "Clearly you’re just trolling for coverage here, and we’ve fallen right for it, haven’t we?"

As evidence, consider the other cars on said car-buying website’s top ten beauties. We’re talking: Vauxhall Mokka, Toyota Corolla, Nisan Micra, SsangYong Tivoli. That’s not just a broken algebraic equation. That’s a trolling algebraic equation.

Apparently the lowest-ranked car, according to this definitely-not-utterly-fictional implementation of the golden ratio, was that notorious minger, the Ford Fiesta ST.

Don’t share fake news, kids. Unless you're half-heartedly deconstructing it at the same time. Then it's fine.

# data.attributes.body.processed
We live in curious times. Rubbish is the new good. They say there's no such thing as bad publicity, and 2019 is doing its very best to prove it.

And look, we’re not saying that a publicity-hungry car-buying website would deliberately identify one of the least attractive cars of the decade, then pump out a press release with a retro-fitted nonsense backstory about ‘algorithms’ and ‘golden ratios’, solely to get everyone to disagree, thus getting said publicity-hungry car-buying website’s name out there.

That would clearly be unfair. What we’re saying is, if you were a publicity-hungry car-buying website wanting to get your name out there any which way, well, identifying one of the least attractive cars of the decade, then pumping out a press release etc etc, yeah, there's a good chance you'd hook a marginally less publicity-hungry car site like, say, this one.

So, anyhow. A car-buying site – whose name has unfortunately just slipped our mind, as does tend to happen in these situations – believes it has mathematical proof that Smart’s bug-eyed city runabout is the most beautiful car of this decade.

According to this press release in front of us, "the intricately designed Smart ForTwo Cabrio was found to take the top spot when it comes to scientifically perfect beauty, being 98.83 per cent accurate to the golden ratio… a famous algebraic equation that has been in use since 300BC."

To which Top Gear respectfully replies, if your famous algebraic equation reckons the Smart ForTwo Cabrio is the hottest of the lot, probably time to recheck your famous algebraic equation.

Actually, scrap that. In fact, Top Gear respectfully replies, "Clearly you’re just trolling for coverage here, and we’ve fallen right for it, haven’t we?"

As evidence, consider the other cars on said car-buying website’s top ten beauties. We’re talking: Vauxhall Mokka, Toyota Corolla, Nisan Micra, SsangYong Tivoli. That’s not just a broken algebraic equation. That’s a trolling algebraic equation.

Apparently the lowest-ranked car, according to this definitely-not-utterly-fictional implementation of the golden ratio, was that notorious minger, the Ford Fiesta ST.

Don’t share fake news, kids. Unless you're half-heartedly deconstructing it at the same time. Then it's fine.

# data.attributes.field_standfirst
Only, it obviously isn’t. Don’t share fake news, kids