Beer in the news

[CorneliusAlphonse]

i tried the molson wheat for kicks, too. shared a can. very slight aroma at first, barely detectable, and that was with a clean palate. no high adjunct flavour, which was a plus. but no other flavour, huge minus. no better than any other macro.

[canuck]

I can't see me purchasing ANY macro produced beer in the foreseeable future. Anytime I do, I'm totally let down and end up wondering why I wasted my money. The latest Keiths Cascade was a prime example.

[jeffsmith]

I'll probably never try it, but I'll trust your judgment.


Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk 2

Ditto.

[brufrog]

I heard about another new brewery opening soon, somewhere. But I'm not saying boo about it because some blogger will just write about it like it was their story (which happens all the time). I'll wait until there is beer to taste.

[NASH]

I heard about another new brewery opening soon, somewhere. But I'm not saying boo about it because some blogger will just write about it like it was their story (which happens all the time). I'll wait until there is beer to taste.

Poor lil' fella

Search the forum for Shippey's


PS: a bbl of beer is still 117.4 L

[brufrog]

Oh sorry I missed the bbl comment. What was that about?

As for my post, It is just a little joke...these days there is very little journalism left. Just news updates and hurried opinions, some from people who are qualified and others not so much. Not much anyone can do about it, really, but it is hard to make a living when people will report news for free, and many people don't care about the source, accuracy, context or quality. You get what you pay for, usually.

Not just in my field, I know...

[brufrog]

Oh, and it is a NB brewery I'm talking about. Actually, two of them. And yes I heard the stuff about Shippey's. I guess that's good, eh?

[chalmers]

You're probably talking about Canadian Beer News? He's taken a few things that I've written up and passed it on to his readers, but always have me credit, so I've never felt hurt. If not him, I wouldn't know who. Hope it wasn't me!

I'm just in it to spread the beer info about the local beer scene, no one is paying us (maybe I should start taking bribes, though). All of the stuff we post (which isn't a lot, and we're not journalists) is direct from the source, either from interviews or from the breweries' twitter and Facebook.

[chalmers]

The bbl comment was regarding your Propeller article.

[brufrog]

The bbl comment was regarding your Propeller article.

I'll check it out. Was it something John said? Or a typo maybe?

[brufrog]

You're probably talking about Canadian Beer News? He's taken a few things that I've written up and passed it on to his readers, but always have me credit, so I've never felt hurt. If not him, I wouldn't know who. Hope it wasn't me!

I'm just in it to spread the beer info about the local beer scene, no one is paying us (maybe I should start taking bribes, though). All of the stuff we post (which isn't a lot, and we're not journalists) is direct from the source, either from interviews or from the breweries' twitter and Facebook.

No not you specifically. Just in general. I write about beer, wine and spirits for a living, but there are lots of people who love it and want to write about it for fun, which of course is their complete right and why would I have a problem with it? That said, many of them have no qualifications to comment on relative quality, but the producers (wineries, breweries, distilleries) will quote and retweet anything positive, and the average consumer can't tell a qualified person from one that knows their shit, so that pisses me off when I see "non-trained" bloggers getting quoted on websites and via social media. And even more pissed off when they are linked to as "sources" for information. PR people are terrible - they will print any positive reviews even if it is from a complete idiot who can't tell when it is a defective product.

The reason I spent all that money on my education was so that I could be a trusted source. Just because you love local beer, wine, & sprits doesn't mean you are a valid media source.

Sorry for whining (or is that whingeing?)...I'm just trying to make a living here.

[chalmers]

The bbl comment was regarding your Propeller article.

I'll check it out. Was it something John said? Or a typo maybe?

In your article in TAPS, you said that a barrel is 164L.

There will be a new 30 barrel (1 barrel = 164 litres) brewhouse and two 120 barrel fermenters, bottling and draft capability and a second cold beer store. The original brewery and Prop Shop will remain open, producing seasonal beers and special releases.

In fact, in North America, a (beer) barrel is 117L.

In the UK a beer barrel is 36 imperial gallons (43 US gal; 164 L). In the US most fluid barrels (apart from oil) are 31.5 US gallons (26 imp gal; 119 L) (half a hogshead), but a beer barrel is 31 US gallons (26 imp gal; 117 L).

I'm surprised that got through the editors at TAPS (or maybe they added it or changed it from the correct volume).

[chalmers]

You're probably talking about Canadian Beer News? He's taken a few things that I've written up and passed it on to his readers, but always have me credit, so I've never felt hurt. If not him, I wouldn't know who. Hope it wasn't me!

I'm just in it to spread the beer info about the local beer scene, no one is paying us (maybe I should start taking bribes, though). All of the stuff we post (which isn't a lot, and we're not journalists) is direct from the source, either from interviews or from the breweries' twitter and Facebook.

No not you specifically. Just in general. I write about beer, wine and spirits for a living, but there are lots of people who love it and want to write about it for fun, which of course is their complete right and why would I have a problem with it? That said, many of them have no qualifications to comment on relative quality, but the producers (wineries, breweries, distilleries) will quote and retweet anything positive, and the average consumer can't tell a qualified person from one that knows their shit, so that pisses me off when I see "non-trained" bloggers getting quoted on websites and via social media. And even more pissed off when they are linked to as "sources" for information. PR people are terrible - they will print any positive reviews even if it is from a complete idiot who can't tell when it is a defective product.

The reason I spent all that money on my education was so that I could be a trusted source. Just because you love local beer, wine, & sprits doesn't mean you are a valid media source.

Sorry for whining (or is that whingeing?)...I'm just trying to make a living here.

After I posted, I realized you didn't mean some (one specific) blogger, just a blogger in general, oops.

In my opinion, if a brewer/winery wants to quote a non-trained writer (let's not only pick on bloggers, there are plenty of shitty print writers or TV producers), there's not much the rest of us can do, except know that the brewery is having to search out positive reviews from folks who aren't knowledgeable, and that speaks could speak volumes on the quality of the product. You are correct that the average Joe might not know any better, but I really don't know how one goes about improving that.

[benwedge]

In my opinion, if a brewer/winery wants to quote a non-trained writer (let's not only pick on bloggers, there are plenty of shitty print writers or TV producers), there's not much the rest of us can do, except know that the brewery is having to search out positive reviews from folks who aren't knowledgeable, and that speaks could speak volumes on the quality of the product. You are correct that the average Joe might not know any better, but I really don't know how one goes about improving that.

I don't know any Halifax breweries that may be doing that right now.

[NASH]

In my opinion, if a brewer/winery wants to quote a non-trained writer (let's not only pick on bloggers, there are plenty of shitty print writers or TV producers), there's not much the rest of us can do, except know that the brewery is having to search out positive reviews from folks who aren't knowledgeable, and that speaks could speak volumes on the quality of the product. You are correct that the average Joe might not know any better, but I really don't know how one goes about improving that.

I don't know any Halifax breweries that may be doing that right now.

[mr x]

In my opinion, if a brewer/winery wants to quote a non-trained writer (let's not only pick on bloggers, there are plenty of shitty print writers or TV producers), there's not much the rest of us can do, except know that the brewery is having to search out positive reviews from folks who aren't knowledgeable, and that speaks could speak volumes on the quality of the product. You are correct that the average Joe might not know any better, but I really don't know how one goes about improving that.

I don't know any Halifax breweries that may be doing that right now.

I am assuming that is well written sarcasm.

[benwedge]

I am assuming that is well written sarcasm.

I'll take that as a compliment. I'm known to be sarcastic.

[PEIBeerGuy]

No not you specifically. Just in general. I write about beer, wine and spirits for a living, but there are lots of people who love it and want to write about it for fun, which of course is their complete right and why would I have a problem with it? That said, many of them have no qualifications to comment on relative quality, but the producers (wineries, breweries, distilleries) will quote and retweet anything positive, and the average consumer can't tell a qualified person from one that knows their shit, so that pisses me off when I see "non-trained" bloggers getting quoted on websites and via social media. And even more pissed off when they are linked to as "sources" for information. PR people are terrible - they will print any positive reviews even if it is from a complete idiot who can't tell when it is a defective product.

The reason I spent all that money on my education was so that I could be a trusted source. Just because you love local beer, wine, & sprits doesn't mean you are a valid media source.

Sorry for whining (or is that whingeing?)...I'm just trying to make a living here.

It's an interesting debate, for sure - expert sources / knowledgeable people, and what makes them so. One of the last courses of my masters in educational technology had a section where we debated the need for professors / instructors / teachers to be "experts" that were "verified" somehow. Many question(ed) the notion that a degree of some sort made one a legitimate expert versus someone who was just well-practiced and knew their stuff (Gladwell's 10,000 hrs. idea, perhaps). For example, look at someone like Hendrix - zero formal musical training, but by practicing and learning from others, I think we'd all agree he was a bit of a reliable source on playing guitar.

My opinion in most disciplines would be that it's useful in this day and age to have trustworthy sources - newspapers, reporters, media personalities, etc. It takes most doubt and guesswork out. That being said, I don't think it always takes a degree or formal training to make one an expert. If they don't have training, though, I think it probably takes the wisdom of the crowd to decide on whether someone is worth trusting or not.

[brufrog]

Of course some hobbysits know their stuff as wellor better than us trained people. Sure. And I have nothing personal against bloggers, as what you do on your own time for fun is your business - but I do have a problem with people with full time jobs and no money problems taking jobs away from qualified people who do this for a living. Me and others like me. So, if someone is doing wine or beer events for free or writing stories for mags and papers for free. That is lost income for us.

For example, people who work for liquor boards or private wine stores writing wine columns (!) or winery sales reps writing magazine articles (!) or wine store employees or wine sales reps doing free wine lists for restaurants and service training (!) These are all ethically wrong but tolerated in the business, just like bribes to restos and bars from wineries, spirits companies and breweries. "I'll print your menus if you let me do your wine list, and I'll give crappy service training for free so you don't have to hire one of those pesky Sommeliers!"

There is not a lot I can do about it but point it out occasionally to consumers so they at least know it is a corrupt business. It is not a blogger's fault if they are linked to by a media source or tourism agency, but it shouldn't happen without someone qualified going through the blog material first, editing it, fact checking it, and making sure it hasn't been stolen from a paid writer (all common problems.) That costs money, so they DON'T vet the material; they just use it - because it is free. They are too lazy or busy or don't care.

Sorry for venting.

[derek]

Of course some hobbysits know their stuff as wellor better than us trained people. Sure. And I have nothing personal against bloggers, as what you do on your own time for fun is your business - but I do have a problem with people with full time jobs and no money problems taking jobs away from qualified people who do this for a living. Me and others like me. So, if someone is doing wine or beer events for free or writing stories for mags and papers for free. That is lost income for us.

John Scalzi (science fiction writer),has a great blog about this. Basically - if you write, you shouldn't write for free.



However:

For example, people who work for liquor boards or private wine stores writing wine columns (!) or winery sales reps writing magazine articles (!) or wine store employees or wine sales reps doing free wine lists for restaurants and service training (!) These are all ethically wrong but tolerated in the business, just like bribes to restos and bars from wineries, spirits companies and breweries. "I'll print your menus if you let me do your wine list, and I'll give crappy service training for free so you don't have to hire one of those pesky Sommeliers!"

I see no reason why employees of the sales agencies shouldn't be writing wine columns - as long as it's in their employers' own newsletters/magazines. Doing so elsewhere, for pay or not, is a clear conflict of interest. However, doing free wine lists or service training for your customers (competency issues aside - any time you take a deal like this, it's buyer beware) is neither ethically wrong, nor bribery (though it may still be illegal - lots of things are illegal without being wrong). It's simply barter.

otoh, there are professional wine writers (one of whom I'm sure I've heard you rant about - and I've definitely heard your brother on the subject!) who are no more competent to judge, so how is it more OK for a winery/brewery to quote one of them, than some blogger who may even have a little more knowledge?

[derek]

Customer sues Ben E. Keith and Red Lobster, alleging un-rinsed draft line cleaning agent caused burning

In a lawsuit filed last week in Dallas County, he says the restaurant had used the lye-like cleaning agent to disinfect the Budweiser keg that morning but had failed to properly rinse the container before refilling it with the beer Grogg would later drink. So Grogg is suing both Ben E. Keith, the supplier that cleaned the kegs, and Red Lobster, which served him the corrosive beer.

But it was Bud! Give me lye, any day.

[brufrog]

Agree that writing for your own company or store newsletter is totally cool. I'm talking about newspapers, independent magazines and radio etc. Not cool.

As for doing training/wine lists as a bonus for or in exchange for buying your products, well, i think it is a form of bribery - which is probably the legal term for barter! I've been known to barter from time to time as well, but not in that way. I have nothing to offer but labour in exchange for $.

It is not as big a deal as giving free wine, spirits or beer to a bar, I suppose. It is all fuzzy, as ethics often are. I tend to avoid places that flood their wine lists with wines from one agent in return for free stuff. And I don't go to bars that only serve one brewery's beer, except brewpubs.

[McGruff]

I definitely stay away from our local Kelseys which only had Molson products on their menu. $7.00 a pop too. I should email them and tell them that.

[mr x]

German brewers warn fracking could hurt beer industry

German brewers have warned Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government that any law allowing the controversial drilling technique known as fracking could damage the country’s cherished beer industry.

The Brauer-Bund beer association is worried that fracking for shale gas, which involves pumping water and chemicals at high pressure into the ground, could pollute water used for brewing and break a 500-year-old industry rule on water purity.

Germany, home to Munich’s annual Oktoberfest – the world’s biggest folk festival which attracts around 7 million visitors – has a proud tradition of brewing and beer drinking.

Under the “Reinheitsgebot”, or German purity law, brewers have to produce beer using only malt, hops, yeast and water.

“The water has to be pure and more than half Germany’s brewers have their own wells which are situated outside areas that could be protected under the government’s current planned legislation on fracking,” said a Brauer-Bund spokesman.

“You cannot be sure that the water won’t be polluted by chemicals so we have urged the government to carry out more research before it goes ahead with a fracking law,” he added.

Germany is Europe’s biggest producer of beer and has the third-largest per-capita consumption after the Czech Republic and Austria.

It is home to more than 1,300 breweries which produce about 5,000 different beers, enough for a drinker to try a new beer for 13.5 years, according to the Brauer-Bund.

With pressure mounting from German industry to at least look into the option of tapping its shale gas reserves, Merkel’s centre-right coalition is working on a law setting out the conditions for exploration that would protect certain areas.

Given resistance from opposition parties which could block the law in the upper house of parliament, it is unlikely that a law on fracking will be passed before an election in September.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... e12090336/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Hub Brewer]

From the Herald this morning...

http://www.thechronicleherald.ca/artsli ... -us-troops" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I knew I should have held onto my little league bats...