Taking the Times to Task
The two-buck Chuck phenomenon aside, can you imagine stories in the New York Times about finding the cheapest wine or whisky when you’re out on the town? I can’t, and it seems to me this is just another of the countless insults beer endures. Why is beer the Rodney Dangerfield of alcoholic beverages? Why is it so acceptable for the media to take cheap shots (yes, pun intended) at beer without even realizing how insulting they’re being?I think he has a good point, but he also gets off his point in this second quoted paragraph. I don't believe there's anything untruthful or misleading or inherently wrong about the story the Times wrote- but it shouldn't have been printed in the Times.I don’t think Seth Kugel, or indeed most of the rest of the beer-ignorant press, sets out maliciously to insult beer. They simply don’t know any better. And that may be the saddest fact of all. It might be downright funny if it weren’t for the fact that people read the Times as America’s “paper of record” and believe what is written in its pages. So while I believe the entire media has a duty to try to be accurate, the Times has an even higher standard to uphold.
This isn't to say there isn't a place for round-up stories on where to get cheap wine, cocktails, or beer. These are domain of the alternative weeklies such as the Village Voice and websites like CitySearch. Once I wrote a story on how to get your daily nutritional requirements from eating nothing but hors d'oeuvres and garnish for the alt-weekly SF Bay Guardian.
I'm not entirely sure I understand the hierarchy there- the free publications are welcome to write about high-end venues but not vice-versa- but it's definitely entrenched.
