This article could compete with the discharge coming out of the literary bowels of Fox News. Here are my reasons for completely dismissing this article:
- The curious masses don't just read a single blog and think the opinions stated there are the end-all opinions on whisky. I know I check a number of sources before potentially coming to a maybe-sort-of opinion about a whisky I've never actually tried myself. And I'm pretty sure that anyone who has a decent understanding of whisky would do the same. Even whisky novices would be smart enough not to only read one blog they found on Google and decide they hate a whisky they've never tried; if they're not smart enough to do this, they're also probably not smart enough to read in the first place.
- Big brands like The Macallan and The Glenlivet don't get brought down overnight by some dude with a blog - they have a global presence and a strong following, because they have good products. People with an obvious agenda against a brand will be viewed as fools, not as prophets.
- John Hansell over at Malt Advocate, for example, runs a great blog that is consistently top-rated in Google and I don't think he's just some socially inept geek with a vengeance. You have to be decently well-connected and respected to run a blog that people actually want to read, because you need access to the products and people that keep a blog interesting.
- A self-respecting blogger would not just rag on a brand for no good reason and expect people to keep listening.
- Please show me an example of a time when such a scenario has actually happened. The article makes no indication that this has any historical precedent. I believe this article is just wild speculation and should have been left on the editing room floor, or better yet, in the author's head.
I personally took offense, too. I mean, I run a whisky blog and am not a socially inept geek with an inferiority complex. It's a superiority complex. Get it right.