A recent piece by Tomm Carroll in the latest issue of Celebrator got my train of thought chugging out of the station. It was on, of all things, the Beer Wars movie (trust me, it never ends). Moreso, it focused on the fallout in the beer community – regarding damn near everything about the film that bloggers, writers, passersby, people’s relatives, and animals with higher intelligence could come up with. Did more viewers like or dislike the movie? Could I care any less about that? Some things we’ll never know, but what I do know is that I’d like to take Mr. Carroll’s assessment and turn it on its head.
The first thing that jumps out about his entry is the “marketing to the craft beer community” aspect. I know that the creators of Beer Wars and their participants had a hand in spreading the word about the film’s release in theaters because I was provided with a free ticket to go see the movie. Carroll calls the entrepreneurial crowd “arguably the film’s true target audience.” I’m just wondering why there hasn’t been more of a buzz amongst the entrepreneurs, be it praise or otherwise. And it’s difficult to accept that a movie focusing heavily on small and independent brewing companies (loosely translated as “craft”) using these kinds of marketing tactics is somehow not about craft beer. If it’s not Craft Beer Wars, as has been claimed, then why didn’t the movie focus solely on the history and growth of Anheuser-Busch, Coors, and Miller? Those were the beer wars of the largest breweries in the country, so why include these infintesimally small craft brewers?
Also, there’s the, as Carroll describes, “nitpicking about the film’s content, instead of discussion about its theme of the institutional and corporate roadblocks facing entrepreneurs.” Fair enough, but if you want to teach a microeconomics class, there are thousands of universities to choose from. When you pit “David vs. Goliath” in a film and spread the word through beer blogging Web sites, yet the theme is an elusive and intangible concept of how to survive in the business world, what kind of reaction did you expect? The content is inherently the message. Do not confuse that.
Furthermore, there are those who would argue that the three-tier distribution system, a rather vast and misunderstood apparatus, has actually been a benefit to smaller, upstart breweries seeking access to the market. This was heavily criticized in the film, but not very effectively, if memory serves. Granted, the idea at its conception was to limit the public’s access to that dreaded beast called alcohol by throwing another roadblock in front of consumers, but the outcome is that it has ultimately opened up shelf space for microbreweries that hadn’t existed before.
Consider if this were not the case in the market today. If brewers had direct access to consumers and retailers, who do you think would dominate? The ones who have dominated for nearly a century, if not more. Now imagine if this occurred in 1990. The odds for a Dogfish Head, a Stone, your local brewery/brewpub staying afloat would be pretty bleak.
Are beer bloggers supposed to feel ashamed or embarrassed that they spoke out on the film’s content? In my opinion, no. I based my review of Beer Wars by looking at the content that was presented, as a seemingly logical connection of arguments. Entrepreneurship just happens to be one, but the film is about the beer world. That’s the chosen backdrop, and when you enter that territory, expect some criticism if you present a flawed argument. Example: wandering around Fairfield, California looking for the Green Valley Brewing Company (an Anheuser-Busch spin-off) while following the story of Rhonda Kallman and New Century Brewing Company – a brewing company that’s also without its own brewery. If you want to make an argument about contract brewing, that’s your prerogative. But that’s clearly not what was intended, and that’s… you guessed it: content.
The bigger issue is the nature of beer writing. Carroll quotes filmmaker Anat Baron’s take on beer writers versus beer bloggers, implying that the writers’ assessments were more astute or level-headed than that of the beer bloggers. I don’t get paid for this, so perhaps my opinions are less valid.
But the main point I’m getting at here is, does it matter? Do you, the above-average beer consumer, care whether or not the writer is paid for their work or freely publish their words? Or is it the content that matters? This is not a knock on some beer publications, but I’m sure you can pick up a copy of certain ones and see spelling and grammatical errors, just as you probably can here.
To put it plainly, we ain’t the hi-falutin’ New York Times, so put things into perspective here and base your views on the most logical arguments you can surmise.




5 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 1, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Stan Hieronymus
I won’t repeat all (meaning you should look at the comments) that came up in conversations that sprung out of the demise of “Beers of the World.”
I will add there’s a lot of crap in blogs, but there’s also great research and great content you don’t see in print. (When I talk about mistakes I’m not talking about spelling errors, but – for instance – mis-reporting a brewery’s production numbers by a factor of 10 fold). It shows us the importance of passion, which may why blogging and craft beer go so well together.
August 1, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Alan
Furthermore, the very idea, the very suggestion that beer bloggers could feel ashamed or embarrassed that they spoke out on the film’s content is a load of crap. The idea that “professional expression” trumps “amateur expression” devalues and defiles expression itself, one of the key freedoms in a democratic society.
It was bizarre that anyone thought that there was a homogeneous craft beer community that somehow would be unanimously of one voice. Each person needs to be free to express what they encounter and experience and that can make for messiness. That a film producer or a magazine publisher doesn’t get that is a question in itself.
August 1, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Joseph Rodgers
As a rookie to craft beer and an avid blog reader, I really enjoyed Beer Wars and the amount of dialogue about the film both before and after it’s release. I feel like Tomm Carrol is trying to flex his marketing skills by segmenting the market and by giving his opinion of who has authority in the beer world.
Of course this comment post has no authorty either.
Cheers,
Joseph
August 2, 2009 at 3:07 pm
E.S. Delia
All very thought-provoking comments. This is one of those issues that crops up from time to time in the beer world, possibly because of the overall egalitarian nature of such a group and product – and I think this is where we find a marked contrast with the wine world, even though they have also had their discussions on this very topic.
I won’t deny that blogs do produce a lot of crap, on any given subject really. And obviously I’m not defending every beer blogger all across the board. However, I read some blogs with as much excellent content as some of my favorite homebrewing and other beer-related books (and of course Brew Like A Monk is one of them!). Had I been a little more attentive this week, I would’ve noticed your post and shared my thoughts over there too, Stan… but hey, great minds think alike, right?
Anyway, this is why I read certain kinds of blogs for certain content and the rest of the time defer to the printed word. It’s all about knowing and understanding the medium you’re getting your information from.
August 2, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Barry (Adeptus)
“Do you, the above-average beer consumer, care whether or not the writer is paid for their work or freely publish their words? Or is it the content that matters?”
Content is king. A simple rule for any form of media.
But of course, caveat emptor, as I’m also a crap blogger :)