A message from Sam (Dogfish Head) on current RateBeer changes

they have certainly lost a number of unpaid people who volunteered for them, whether they were vocal or not.

 

Jean Van Roy (Cantillon) apologizes for his decision. Worth reading:

"To all my friends on Ratebeer,

The decision I took wasn't aimed at the people rating beers and commenting on RB. Some of you are personal friends. A lot of you are great and passionate beer connoisseurs, and I did not mean to question your integrity.
If my decision hurt some of you, I apologize. I took it sincerely and honestly.

A year ago, when I decided to cancel the presence of Birra Del Borgo at our Quintessence, I said "For us to open the Cantillon doors to ABInbev is to allow the fox to mind the geese". Today, it's clear to me that the fox is getting hungrier every day. I know that ABI only took a minority part in RB, but ABI is not a charitable organization - if they did it, it's for business, and business only. "Which business?" is a question that remains open.

In addition to this, the awards given out by RB every January are the most important ones for the craft beer scene. RB/ABI giving awards out to the cream of the crop of the beer world will be like McDonald's giving stars to restaurants.
Not with me, and not in my name.

Cheers to all of you.

Jean"

 

Do you also have a pointer to a description and details of the decision he made? I can assume it was to stop cooperating with Rate Beer but this announcement suggests there was something he said/did earlier.

 

I thought this brief message would be self evident from the quoted apology, but here it is in the best translation avail.

"Like Sam Calagione, owner of the brewery Dogfish Head, I also decided to ask the website ratebeer.com to withdraw all opinions and comments on beers from the brewery.

As a reminder, sending bought shares of the most important social media in the brewing scene.
After the takeover of breweries, distributors, producers, this is the social media.
The Giants of industry have the means to control everything and are in the process of doing so.

Today, the craft brewing scene is still powerful enough to react quickly, to stick together and to make, as far as we can,"

 

That would be as ridiculous as a tire company giving out prestigious stars to fine-dining restaurants.

 

Thanks.

Yes the decision was self evident, but not how he presented his decision nor why he might have felt the desire to further explanation or to reassure his fans it was not questioning their personal integrity. DFH used a different starting point as background as part of their announcement.

 

Wonder what the reaction would have been from both the website owner and beer geeks if, previous to this deal, Anheuser-Busch (or MillerCoors) had asked the site "to remove all their beer reviews and mentions on the RateBeer website immediately" ?.

 

Good on you Sam, love the show of integrity!

 

Sam, while I like some of your beers I love your integrity

Not a fan of Rate Beer, even less so now

Someone above mentioned "journalistic integrity" thanks for that laugh

 

Excellent well thought out statement.

I celebrate this transparency.

 

Paste Magazine published an article on this topic: https://www.pastemagazine.com/artic...eries-want-their-beers-off-ratebeer-afte.html

Cheers!

 

https://www.beeradvocate.com/ratebeer/?path=/RatingsQA.htm

Funny, they don't mention anything in the rating formula about if your brewer or affiliate just buys the site....

"3) The rating was made by a brewer or brewer affiliate
Ratings by brewers or their affiliates of their own products is a strictly forbidden at RateBeer. The ratings and the accounts of those making the ratings are swiftly deleted and account renewal is forbidden for life. 'Blackballing' brewers for blatant misconduct in this regard may be considered in extreme cases. "

Perhaps the simplest thing to do would be for Inbev to remove all their beers...

 

That's also interesting since it shows so much influence of and reliance on BA discussions.

 

While I understand your point, and the whole idea of there being a conflict of interest here has been beaten to death, I think it's not terribly difficult to understand that there is a marked difference between ACTUAL IMPROPRIETY (a brewer rating their own beers/products) and a conflict of interest (which is a situation where the risk of impropriety is heightened due to the aforementioned conflict of interest).

I'd also point out that, strictly speaking, that rule covers their new ownership from manipulating ratings to their benefit as well, since that would simply be a more direct form of brewers "rating their own beers".

To that end, would a disclaimer noting that their ownership has no ability to unduly influence the ratings system to favor their own beers do anything to satisfy you?

 

About as much as a president saying he won't collude with Russia...

 

Is it just me, or does anybody else find it odd that BA just sent out an email about Ratebeer selling out that was sponsored by Dogfish Head? Seems like a brewer sponsoring something like that could be a conflict of interest to me. I don't know much about the journalistic integrity codes, etc so maybe it is acceptable, but I find it odd.
Heres the photo:

 

I imagine you are the only one to make that ridiculous equivalency on a site that attracts more fair minded folks that that, but I could be wrong.

 

I read a couple of pages, but honestly with how long pages are on BA I don't have time to read through fully right now.

The whole discussion about journalism I would point out that Facebook, Twitter, etc... are considered media companies today. While Ratebeer may accumulate user data it is a part of the media. While each review may not be journalism, the results and algorithms that present it is clearly the product of Ratebeer and should be subject to journalistic integrity.

As for the main point. I never used Ratebeer, I do see their rankings in a lot of craft beer stores and I will probably discount their worth now. I rarely bought beer based on them though.

 

Some folks better pray In-Bev doesn't buy the street in front of their homes.