On March 29, tragedy struck in Anhui Province, China, when a Xiaomi SU7 crashed while operating in Navigation on Autopilot (NOA), an advanced driving assistance feature developed by Xiaomi. Three college students aboard the vehicle were killed after the SUV left the highway and collided at approximately 60 mph (97 km/h). Although the system detected an obstacle and engaged emergency braking, it failed to prevent the fatal accident.
News of the incident spread rapidly across China’s internet, sparking widespread public shock. In response, Xiaomi’s stock valuation plummeted, erasing roughly 120 billion Hong Kong dollars (about USD 15.4 billion) from its market capitalization in just two days. Public skepticism toward Xiaomi’s intelligent driving technology quickly intensified. Notably, Chinese state media outlet Guancha.cn criticized the incident, highlighting that exaggerated marketing promises could lead directly to real-world tragedies.
In one especially poignant detail, a victim’s mother revealed she had repeatedly warned her daughter not to trust the autonomous driving system overly. Despite these warnings, the daughter reportedly assured her mother that the system was safe.
Misleading Marketing Creates Dangerous Misconceptions
The primary issue emerging after the crash is the widespread misuse of terms such as “intelligent driving” within marketing materials, creating consumer confusion. Not only Xiaomi but numerous Chinese EV brands have marketed Level 2 Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) in ways that suggest they approach fully autonomous driving capability. Misleading language such as “hands-free driving,” “automatic obstacle avoidance,” and “advanced intelligent driving” has become common, leading consumers unfamiliar with the technology to believe the car could drive itself without supervision.
Exaggerated promotional videos further deepen this misunderstanding. Content depicting drivers removing their hands from steering wheels—or even closing their eyes—has proliferated on Chinese social media, garnering hundreds of thousands of views. Shortly after the crash, footage surfaced of another Xiaomi SU7 driver reportedly asleep behind the wheel on a public highway, underscoring persistent confusion and misuse.
However, Level 2 ADAS still require continuous driver attention and intervention. Automakers have often failed to communicate clearly the real limitations of their technology. Instead, many have promoted these systems as if they offer complete autonomous driving, presenting substantial safety risks from marketing rather than technological inadequacy. Experts argue that the industry must urgently correct this dangerous perception gap.
Chinese Authorities Call for Immediate Regulatory Action
Following the accident, Chinese authorities and media outlets emphasized the need for stricter regulations governing the marketing of ADAS and autonomous driving technologies. Government-backed media sharply criticized misleading promotional language, with some stating bluntly that such “advertisements distorting reality threaten lives.”
The issue extends beyond Xiaomi. Tesla previously faced backlash in China for its marketing of “Full Self Driving” features, ultimately revising promotional language after public criticism.
In response, Chinese regulators are preparing to enact tighter controls on advertising terms related to autonomous and assisted driving technologies. Officials seek to ensure manufacturers clearly and accurately communicate technology limitations and driver responsibilities, establishing clearer guidelines to prevent consumer misunderstanding.
Time for Industry-Wide Reflection and Reform
The recent tragedy highlights a critical lesson: misunderstanding the limitations of ADAS and autonomous systems can have devastating real-world consequences. Intelligent driving technologies, even advanced ones, remain support tools and do not replace human driver oversight.
Ultimately, this accident was less about technological failure and more about dangerously inflated consumer expectations created by misleading marketing. The incident serves as a stark warning: As vehicles become increasingly automated, clear communication and consumer education about driver responsibilities and system limits must keep pace.
