Part of beer’s appeal to me is its affordability (relative to wine) and being a beverage for the average person. So while the helmet was quite misplaced in the Today Show spot considering the audience, the idea of craft beer being associated with the helmet doesn’t bother me much. I only care about enhancing its image for our senators and house reps who, in many states, fail to repeal some of their antiquated laws, which is better achieved through local lobbying by groups like Free the Hops anyway.

The Brewer’s Association and others want to see craft beer gain more market share. But 90% most of the consumer base can’t identify with it. We are beer GEEKS. The greater population doesn’t want to hang out with us or our beers! That’s where the helmet comes in. It shows that we (and our beers) are just like the rest of society. And that is good for the market share goal.

I suppose that a counter-argument would revolve around not wanting that type of drinker. But then are we not sending mixed signals with our all you can drink festivals?

Besides, 10% growth is 10% growth no matter where it comes from. And 4% market share is 4% market share. Seems like these bottom line figures tend to be emphasized a lot by the BA.

Pardon the sloppiness, it hit past 2am on the East Coast. -Adam

Thanks for a very gracious response. You could easily have taken what I said as being personal, and that was never my intention. All of my beefs were with the way the Today Show set it up and characterized beer the way they did. It sounds like you did the best you could under some trying circumstances.

Best,

J

First, Lisa’s right in that the “editor” title I suddenly got handed was a surprise to me as well, though not a huge surprise as I seem to be given all sorts of unexpected titles when doing TV. Second, I think you bring up an interesting and valid issue about craft beer in general, which is whether it’s helpful to try to push people (TV audiences in particular) toward interesting beer, even if the medium itself necessarily means you’re going to get less than technical (and unfortunately, sometimes less than flat-out accurate) about the subject; or perhaps the question is how best to go about it.

My general feeling is that if I can get people to start drinking good beer, period, that’s a useful thing to do. Typically, if I have a beer segment coming up (which happens from time to time), what ensues is a back and forth with the producers where their concern is that their audience–over six million people for Today–can find what I’m recommending, and my concern is that I recommend something that’s terrific, whether it’s an American craft beer, an import like the Lindemans Pomme or the Ayinger Oktoberfest, or who knows what. I’d rather do it in conjunction with factual accuracy, sure; but you never know what the hell is going to happen on live TV, so as a guest you simply try to get through the segment, mention all the beers you intended to mention, and hope that in the end some of the audience out there ditches the six-packs of flavorless “lite” dreck and instead rushes out to buy something that’s actually beer.

Anyway, glad you caught the segment even if it filled you with horror. I do push for beer stories in the magazine, and consider myself lucky when I actually get one green-lighted, as it were (if I actually were the editor, the process would be a lot speedier). The Sang Yoon story you mentioned actually was a feature; the interview you linked to was just a web adjunct to it. And the story is specifically about beer–the link’s here, if you’re interested: http://www.foodandwine.com/articles/the-keg-vs-the-cork-in-sonoma (not sure how to make a comment hot-link, so I won’t try). With luck I’ll get more beer features on the roster in the future.

Cheers, and all best wishes,

Ray Isle

I do understand your comment, and I also see it in the context of what the Guild tries to do. I do, of course, disagree somewhat, even as I see your point of view and appreciate your thoughts. Many of the nits I picked were indeed small, and even understandable, but they do, taken in total, paint a portrait of a sloppy segment, riddled with mistakes and misinformation that tends to be, I think, bad for the craft beer industry’s image. That’s the benefit of being a rogue freelancer, I can speak more openly without the constraints of advertiser concerns or having to protect an organization’s reputation or perception in the market.

Frankly, I used the slip of the tongue you mentioned merely as an excuse to show that Isle — cross-drinker or not — has not been using Food & Wine magazine to cover beer in any meaningful way, despite his, as you say, having “become a convert.”

I know it’s easy to think about all the many experts who could have brought a lot of depth of knowledge to a segment like this but the editorial reality is that segment producers at national morning shows are looking for the cachet of an editor from a major branded publication and someone from Food & Wine carries a lot of that, plus, he’s a comfortable and relaxed guest. And, the reality that Food & Wine is two blocks from Rockefeller Center is a nice plus, since Ray can be on set in literally 5 minutes.

From our perspective, it’s better to have 5 million people exposed to beer as a topic, even though we might have changed the content of the segment had we had the opportunity to do so. I hope you take our comment the way it is intended — to shed a little more perspective on how this all comes together because we can certainly see your point of view too. Cheers!