What is journalism coming to?

Tony should definitely never talk about beer, or any alcoholic beverage for that matter. Cooking? Sure. Doing rails of coke? Yep. Beer? Not on your life.

 

I guess I always considered the West Coast IPA to be the standard bearer for American IPAs. When I think "plain old American IPA," my mind goes to either Anchor Liberty Ale or Sierra Nevada Celebration, both of which I'd consider West Coast in execution. Obviously this is a bit subjective, though.

I argue with their putting Victory Hop Devil and DFH 60 Minute in the same breath, though. They're pretty different to me.

Just for the record, I'm one of the weirdos that prefers more categorization over less, so I also subscribe to the Midwest (I)IPA category (beers with the bitterness of West Coast IPAs but with an added sweetness and heftier malty backbone such as Bells Two Hearted, Surly Furious, Pipeworks Ninja vs. Unicorn, Revolution Anti-Hero, etc.)

 

I wouldn't really call him a tool, he just doesn't really care about beer culture. He's never been shy about those opinions, either, and has never pretended to be some sort of arbiter of beer. He's said things along the lines of, "The best beer is a cold one in front of me," or, "Drink whatever the most popular beer is among the locals," (paraphrased of course). That's not to say he doesn't enjoy craft; he just does not advocate for it. He feels the same about coffee and third-wave coffee culture. Like I said, I think the difference (and why I give him a break) is that he is what he says he is and doesn't pretend otherwise.

 

Nothing there seemed to really deserve people taking their pitchforks out (perhaps other than the slight slander against British ale). Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill.

The article did unintentionally illustrate the absolute mess that is current NEIPA/IPA over-classification. The funniest line was: "The New England IPA is what people are drinking right now." Does that mean that people aren't currently drinking any of those other IPAs?

The only thing that I find really worth commenting on is the entire premise of the article (and I'm surprised that no one here has specifically mentioned it) - that the reader will: "Learn about the 10 styles of IPA." On top of that, the article outlines 7 modifiers that can be added to those 10 styles to differentiate beers within them. The breakdown between styles and modifiers really doesn't make much sense.

If 1 style has 10 distinct substyles, then either someone is being far too broad with the parent style, or far too specific with the substyles (or both). Having said that, the author is trying to provide a roadmap to a landscape designed by brewers and drinkers, so my expectations should be in check.

 

Right... Bourdain wants his food and drink to be inclusive of as many people as possible, and will reject what he perceives to have airs of exclusivity.

 

Ehh . . . Tony's palate sucks. Full stop.

As far as craft beer goes, he feels the same way about wine and liquor of any complexity.

He's a great story teller, adventurer, and has a lot of friends who are great chefs. That's what he should be appreciated for.

 

British beer historian Martyn Cornell, writing about session beers, claims

”So – there’s no rule that says session beers HAVE to be 4 per cent or lower, merely personal prejudice/preference, any cut-off level at all over what constitutes/does not constitute a “session beer” is going to be arbitrary,...." Martyn Cornell, Zythophile, 20 May, 2011

http://zythophile.co.uk/2011/05/20/how-old-is-the-term-session-beer/

 

Session beers have been regarded as sub 4% ABV because of their origin. When I began drinking practically all draught beer in pubs was of this strength. Occasionally you would meet something like Bass at 4.4% which would be regarded as a luxury or premium strength beer.
A session was the time during which a pub was allowed to serve alcohol.There were two sessions a day,lunchtime and evening.A session beer could be drunk throughout without too many problems.
Both the low strength and limited drinking time were a legacy of wartime requirements. It took 70 years to abolish licensing hours!
Regarding IPA , the original ones were almost always the weakest beers brewed from a 19th century brewery.
Session IPAs like Greene King IPA have been round since WW1.They are nothing new or recent.

 

I understand/already know all of that and have greatly enjoyed such beers on multiple visits to the UK, as well as from having read many of your prior posts on the topic. Any assertion of such a clean cut off or categorization has a certain arbitrary nature to it.

My point was simply that according to Cornell it is not written down anywhere that the definition of "session" is 4% or less. So the assertion that such a dichtomous cut off exists has a certain arbitrary nature.

 

Yes, the article has flaws but kudos to the author for calling out the bullshit that is double (and triple) dry-hopping. A beer is either dry-hopped or it's not.

Also, the author has a BA account @alex_delany and he's posted links to his articles in the past. Looks like he hasn't been active in a while though. Would like to hear from him and hopefully we can turn this into a constructive discussion.

 

That's true, the sailors didn't really hop up those barrels of beer for the journey around the horn. It's a flip piece and folks around here are the pure wrong audience. It's true, we all write funny someday!!

 

True enough but like beer styles things just happened.Nobody wrote things down or defined it because it was just assumed and understood.What you got in the pub you could drink a lot of because it was all sub 4% almost wherever you went.
There is of course no official governing body for beer matters.What we have today as Topsy said "just growed"
The whole notion of beer styles is quite recent anyway. They were just names often used interchangeably,commonly the same beer has been sold as Stout or Porter,or as Pale Ale,IPA or Bitter at different times.
In these parts a beer over 4% ABV would be described as Premium.

 

Which is exactly why 4% is a somewhat arbitrary approximation rather than a fixed number with no fuzzy boundaries, and probably why Cornell writes:

”So – there’s no rule that says session beers HAVE to be 4 per cent or lower, merely personal prejudice/preference, any cut-off level at all over what constitutes/does not constitute a “session beer” is going to be arbitrary,...." Martyn Cornell, Zythophile, 20 May, 2011

 

Do you remember a time when the popular press journalism was ever any better with any topic? In my mind, this type of glossing over, "munging" together, lack of homework, etc. is exactly what has characterized the popular press for as long as I can remember.

 

Ditto what drtth wrote. The more acts of journalism I read, the less I'm impressed with those who practice it.

With articles like this, I always envision a dialogue going something like...
Editor: "Hey Junior---we need an article on craft beer. You drink that stuff, don't you?"
Assistant: "Why yes, when I can't get a good wine. I just had a Third Shift Amber the other day."

 

As a primer for the completely uninitiated, it is not TOO terrible. However, here are my problems with the article:
"New England Style IPA -
This IPA is unfiltered (which makes it hazy) and has extremely low bitterness from using blends of hops that lend intense, fruity flavor. New England style IPAs are often dry-hopped and tend to be fermented to have lower carbonation."

That is some serious ignorance on the part of the author of this article...if you need me to state the why behind my claim, I will.

"Oat IPA -
While West Coast IPAs are crisp, clean, and sharp, IPAs brewed with either flaked oats or oat milk have a lazy, lethargic, cozy mouthfeel."

What on earth is an Oat IPA...I am in the industry and never knew adding oats (flaked or malted) was a style in unto itself. Also, what the heck is oat milk???!!!


Other than those glaring issues which are just incorrect, this article is strictly written for the craft beer neophytes.

 

Milkshake IPA?....nope...never heard of that style.
Oat IPA?...nope...not that one either.
East Coast IPA? Well I'm in SC and we're on the east coast...but nope...sorry.

 

I don't think an editor should be allowed to assign a topic for an article to a junior writer unless that editor is knowledgeable enough to critique the finished article before publication. That's probably what we have here with this Bonappetit article.

 

Beer journalism has always been of doubtful accuracy. Many myths have arisen from acceptance of articles written years ago and used as "sources" which were in fact no better informed than what is being discussed in this thread.
A large proportion of books on beer contain errors as authors copy each other and use things from unresearched writings.Just look at the misconceptions which abound over IPA and Scottish beer.

 

I thought it was pretty good article to explain to a craft beer IPA noob. West Coast is usually deemed piney and probably the most bitter of all the sub-styles however and they described it as "bright and fruity". Otherwise it was pretty good IMO.

For Belgian IPAs, they should have recommended Lagunitas Lil Sumpin Wild and Flying Dog's Raging Bitch as they are old standbys. Clown Shoes makes a good one as well.