I just read Zac Palmer's blog on the Mercedes steering trick.
He keeps referring to toe out.
I believe he is talking camber.

Toe in/out is the front of the tire vs the rear of the tire. Wider at the front is toe out, narrower at the front is toe in.
Camber is leaning in/out at the top, And yes, most race cars run negative camber (in at the top) to help the car corner more stable. When you lean on the front tire in a turn, especially on a banked track like in NASCAR, you gain camber, and you don't want to gain too much. And, negative camber will make the tire wear more on the inside edge, and run hotter in that area as well.
Zero camber on the straights would help the entire tread to contact the track, and allow it to cool off.

I have no idea how you could adjust the tie rods at speed to change the toe.

With a movable suspension part, you could, however, change camber.

Almost every Autoblog article seems to have inaccuracies these days. For example, I’ve seen numerous articles about transverse-layout FWD-based cars using ZF’s 8HP transmission.

The 8HP is only compatible with longitudinal engines. Aisin-Warner (Toyota subsidiary) makes the 8-speed transmissions used in almost every FWD-based car with an 8 speed transmission that isn’t a Ford or GM product. That includes every single BMW product that’s based on the UKL or FAAR platform (all MINIs, 2-series Active Tourer, new 1-series (not available in US), X1/X2, and 2-series Gran Coupe). VW also uses the same transmission in the US-spec Arteon, Atlas, Tiguan, Jetta. Volvo uses the Aisin 8-speed in every model, PSA Groupe (Peugeot, Citroen, DS, Opel, Vauxhall) does too.

Another example of inaccuracies is the recent article about the future Mercedes SL. In that article Autoblog claimed many inaccuracies about engines such as claiming the 3.0L I-6 is twin-turbocharged when it’s not, or claiming that engine is used in the C43 AMG, which it’s not.

There’s a lot of little things like that which make me question the accuracy of Autoblog articles.

I recently read an article by Jeremy Korzeniewski regarding pickup trucks likely to pass the 200,000 mile mark. As is the case these days, media covers only what is current, in this sense, meaning newer vehicles within a five-year span. Additionally, he included full-size trucks with mid-size trucks. This is like comparing apples with oranges. The two types of models have varying load capabilities regardless of manufacturer. The research should reflect a span of vehicles beyond the "five-year" span. Maintenance of any vehicle is the true basis of how long it will last. Personally, I ordered an F-150 Heritage in 2004. It is just over 175,000 miles and is still going strong. I have hauled loads of rock, gravel, wood, building materials, computers, etc. The rear shocks are the original parts yet to be changes. I have kept maintenance up on it since day one. I've walked the used car lot of the Ford dealer when I have maintenance done and am amazed at how many vehicles within the past five years are on the used car lot. Most of them have an average of 20,000 to 45,000. The manufacturer and models vary, but it makes me wonder what's wrong with the vehicle if it has low mileage. Deeper research and "same-model" comparison that includes maintenance will provide the consumer with sound information to purchase a vehicle. I have yet to see a Honda pick-up haul full sheets of plywood and/or sheet rock, rocks, gravel, or cinder-block in large loads. I've made many trips to the local Home Depot when the contractors are there in the morning. Honda's and Tacoma's aren't the popular vehicle if you were to take a parking lot survey there at that time.

Jon Ramsey's information about the F-150 is dead wrong. The 209' truck hasn't existed in over a decade and come in all trims, not just the Lariat.

Here are the correct dimensions.

Drive

4x2

4x4

Cargo Box (ft.)

5.5

6.5

5.5

6.5

Wheelbase (in.)

145.0

156.8

145.0

156.8

Code

Description (in.)

A

Head Room (Front)

40.8

40.8

40.8

40.8

B

Head Room (Rear)

40.4

40.4

40.4

40.4

C

Inside Length(1) (at floor)

67.1

78.9

67.1

78.9

D

Leg Room (Front) (maximum)

43.9

43.9

43.9

43.9

Leg Room (Rear)

43.6

43.6

43.6

43.6

E

Open Tailgate to Ground (Empty)(2)

34.0

34.6

35.7

36.1

F

Inside Height(1)

21.4

21.4

21.4

21.4

G

Front Overhang

37.8

37.8

37.8

37.8

H

Overall Length

231.9

243.7

231.9

243.7

I

Width (Max.) (excluding mirrors)

79.9

79.9

79.9

79.9

J

Shoulder Room (Front)

66.7

66.7

66.7

66.7

Shoulder Room (Rear)

65.9

65.9

65.9

65.9

K

Hip Room (Front)

62.5

62.5

62.5

62.5

Hip Room (Rear)

64.7

64.7

64.7

64.7

L

Width Between Wheelhouses(1)

50.6

50.6

50.6

50.6

M

Max. Load Width(1) (at floor)

65.2

65.2

65.2

65.2

N

Cab Height (Empty)(2)

75.6

75.7

77.2

77.3

O

Ground Clearance

8.5

8.4

9.4

9.3

Your Uber Accident article is less than accurate as Uber does require drivers to carry Rideshare Insurance. They also offer Rideshare Insurance to those who didn't have it before it became a requirement.

Until it became a requirement, Rideshare companies required all drivers to carry general auto insurance which is confirmed when they sign on. While it is a requirement in so.e states it is not a requirement in all states.

One other point to be made is that because it is not a requirement in many states, not enough companies carrying Rideshare Insurance as yet, therefore, drivers are sheered toward companies that do.

Finally, there is a general reader concern that your article would single out "Uber" when Rideshare companies use one another as models for general standards. If you were being honest, then you should present that all Rideshare drivers are regular people as are taxie drivers, soccer moms, truck drivers, pizza delivery driver, and even you are not exempt from having accidents.