This is what I get for defending Bud Light
An anonymous blog reader recently posted this:
I find it amusing that you chose Bud Light for your poll. I have to assume that your a micro/import consumer, but why not list all 3 major light beers, Miller Lite, Coors Light, and Bud Light? You are obviously not a fan of Bud Light and obviously in a minority catagory with your alcoholic beverage choice. Bud Light being the number one selling beer in this country, are you insinuating that those of us who enjoy Bud Light are lame? Seems to me that an American Company like Anheuser-Busch (Not Canadian owned Coors, or South African owned Miller)spends countless amounts of money of disaster relief, wildlife preservation, consumer education and awareness, and responsible drinking campaigns keeps them quite far from lame...or sucking for that matter. Maybe next weeks topic should be, "Biased newspaper columnists trying to look and sound cool by slamming something they no little about...Lame or No? Give me a break, I truely dislike the POst Crescent more and more as the months roll by. Am I mistaken, or are you also the same guy who ran an article on why Designated Drivers suck? Now that IS lame.
This is an example of what I like to call "phantom criticism." This is when a reader rips you for saying something you didn't actually say. For the record, Bud Light Fan, if you're still reading me: (1) I was one of ONLY TWO people who said Bud Light DOES NOT SUCK. That means, against my better judgment, I kinda like Bud Light, which renders the rest of this post moot. But because this is so much fun, (2) If we say something sucks on this blog, that doesn't insinuate that people who like said suckiness suck. This is known as the "Creepy Robin Williams Fan Rule." You might suck for reasons unrelated to Bud Light. (3) Yes, you're mistaken on the designated drivers thing. I honestly have no clue what in the hell you're talking about on that one. Perhaps you're thinking of the story I did on why handicapped parking is sham? Or my suggestion that the elderly should be used for firewood?
I do like the Does he suck? idea: Biased newspaper columnists trying to look and sound cool by slamming something they no little about. I'm voting Not Suck on that one, I think.
posted by Steve Hyden @ 9:43 AM
14 Comments:
Being that my job is entirely centered on reader feedback, I strongly second Steve's assessment. You'd be amazed at how many times you have to ask someone what exactly they're talking about when they say you/your work/your employer/your profession suck.
How does wildlife preservation and disaster relief make Bud Light taste any better?
If I dump on a plate, and then give a nickel to a homeless guy, does it suddenly taste like steak?
Thank you, Anheuser Busch for your wonderful corporate citizenship. Will you now stop peeing in cans and bottles and start making beer instead?
Seriously, Steve -- no slamming Bud Light until you know something about it.
This weekend, put on a Dale Jr. jacket and incessantly say WASSSUP!
Then head to the bar -- grind against hot women, get rejected and turn to the less attractive girls.
After that, get in a minor fight with a random guy at the bar. When all your Miller Lite drinking friends leave with someone at the night's end, drive home drunk and cry yourself to sleep.
Then you'll know enough to slam Bud Light.
The vote wasn't whether or not Anheuser-Busch sucks. We can agree Bud Light sucks without thinking A-B does. This dude needs to relax and play along. It's just for fun.
He would have been much better served saying that all beer in general sucks. Much more accurate, too.
Not to make any bold statements, here...but said writer could be lame.
No, not because he likes Bud Light. But rather that he likes it that much.
I've never liked a product to such an extent that I researched the philanthropic activities of its parent corporation.
Nor have I prepared for heated debate by appealing to the patriotic leanings of the audience through arguing the effects of consolidation within a growing global economy.
uh, road apples did not say that up there. he was in bed at the time or on the toilet at the time.
i've researched the philantropic activities of most products that i spend my money on. i like to know who they're supporting. ...
bud sucks.
Glad my e-mail sparked more interest than the original question. Mostly it really just bothers me that there is always so much negativity and unbalanced news from the Post Crescent, as a bartender, it gets old, from the smoking ban to beer, it's always something negative in regards to the part-time work I do to make ends meet. Yeah, I like Bud Light, I like Coors Light and a shot of Jack as well. So a toast, raise your Heineken up high and I'll raise my Bud Light...to my conformity and your arrogance and mostly to moving on to the next topic
How has the paper been unbalanced in its coverage of part-time bartenders?
The Smoking Ban issue and it's negative effects on the bar industry...obviously noting the health issue...Music piped outside of bars on College Ave, reckless reporting on underage consumption, overcomsumption, negative personal opinions regarding specific establishments, and so much more. Most bar owners are very intelligent and professional business people who are negatively effected by most of the Post Crescents articles in regards to their overall business. This may not be the consensus of those who read this blog (blast away), but trust me, it is the general consensus of many of us in the industry. I will give the Post Crescent props for the "Weekend" or "Encore" section in Thursday editions. A very redeeming section I look forward to weekly. The bar review section could be better served by excluding personal opinions and sticking to the basics and letting readers decide for themselves what they persoanlly like or dislike. There are a lot of strangely impressionable people in this community that take everything they read as fact and not opinion. Am I really that far off in this assessment? Reading some of the responses to my original post, the maturity level, respect, and lack of old fashioned tact are mind numbing.
I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment of our bar coverage. Re: the smoking ban, we've done a ton of stories about the negative impact on businesses and provided bar owners ample opportunities to speak out about it. But we also talk to ban supporters about the health dangers involved. In other words, we report both sides. My guess is bar owners like it when we report stuff they agree with, and don't like it when we report stuff they don't agree with. That's par for the course for just about everybody.
As for your other points, I don't know what you mean about "reckless" reporting on underage drinking, etc. How is it reckless? I actually just wrote a story on college drinking, and went out of my way to talk about how the media sometimes exaggerates the amount of drinking that goes on. But it's a fact that Wisconsinites binge-drink more than people in any other state, that beer is cheaper here than almost anywhere, and that the culture is generally more permissive than it is in most other states. Is that a bad thing? I don't know, but it's worth discussing, isn't it?
As a bartender, maybe you don't want that discussed. Maybe you see discussion as being automatically bad. But I don't. And if you look at our coverage on the whole, rather than a few stories some of your co-workers might not like, I think you'll see we're pretty fair. But then again, maybe you won't.
Re: the review comment, I can see your point but I disagree. A review by nature gives an opinion. And in my opinion, that's what people want when they read about an establishment: Do you think this place is any good? I don't think most people are dumb. I think they can figure out what's opinion and what's not.
"If I dump on a plate, and then give a nickel to a homeless guy, does it suddenly taste like steak?"
I don't care if this is immature. It's freakin' hilarious.
I concur with almost everything in your last post, but I read your paper daily and in my opinion, there is a blatant slant in regards to the Post Crescents stance on the smoking issue. I feel like this communication has gone on far longer than I anticipated and veered far from by original question about representing the 3 major light beers in your poll versus singling out one brand, which was my original contention. Let me conclude by saying that you as a writer have the power of distribution behind you and therefore a certain expectation of professionalism and respect to your readers, and I appreciate that you have extended those courtesies to me through this blog. This dialog if nothing else has been interesting for me and probably entertaining or laughable to others reading this. Cheers.
Post a Comment
<< Home