What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Free Speech, Censorship, Beer, Oh My... (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Another this might break the boards thing but this felt like an interesting intersection of a bunch of stuff we've talked about.

The gist is this:

Flying Dog Brewery has several beers with names some people consider offensive.

The Brewers Association created a standard for members that put some limitations on what brewers could use for naming their beers if they wanted to remain a member of the association.

Flying Dog Brewery said this was not cool and dropped out of the association. 

This woman wrote this article strongly criticizing Flying Dog for their actions.  

What do you think? 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Another this might break the boards thing but this felt like an interesting intersection of a bunch of stuff we've talked about.

The gist is this:

Flying Dog Brewery has several beers with names some people consider offensive.

The Brewers Association created a standard for members that put some limitations on what brewers could use for naming their beers if they wanted to remain a member of the association.

Flying Dog Brewery said this was not cool and dropped out of the association. 

This woman wrote this article strongly criticizing Flying Dog for their actions.  

What do you think? 
Click to expand...
Brewers Association has their right to set standards of decency (like you have chosen with this message board). Fly Dog has a right to leave the association, just like posters here can leave if they don't like the parameters. 

 
KCitons said:
Not that I know of. No need to apologize.

It's your rodeo, I'm just a clown.
Click to expand...
Ha. I see what you mean after MSU explained. I don't need my own thread. I'm too scattered. I did think the censorship thing was sort of timely given what we've been talking about. All good. 

 
The Association is entitled to their standards.  Apparently responsible adult standards.  Ultimately they may find that writing a standard is a pain as some object and many will parse the standard.

The Brewer is entitled to go leave the Association and to express his displeasure therewith.  He has a right to be puerile, juvenile, misogynistic and offensive in his speech.  If he believes that appeals to his market the business decision is his.  (Interesting whether marketing alcohol to juvenile minds under some sort of misogynistic appeal might create a new form of liability when one of his customers commits a bad act under the influence.  there are always attorneys thinking about these things.)

The writer is entitled to express her view. I thought she did so fairly well.

Myself, I enjoy an occasional dip in the juvenile pool but I do try to avoid setting up residence. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s said:
Brewers Association has their right to set standards of decency (like you have chosen with this message board). Fly Dog has a right to leave the association, just like posters here can leave if they don't like the parameters. 
Click to expand...
And people are free to criticize Flying Dog for doing so.  

(I know you know that -- just adding on).

 
Shouldn't this be moved to the politics sub-forum? :hophead:

This has to do with a brand of beer with a name that is not PC (to say the least) which generally is more of a political discussion. And other free speech threads have moved to that forum.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
And people are free to criticize Flying Dog for doing so.  

(I know you know that -- just adding on).
Click to expand...
I think maybe that's the question @IvanKaramazov  Did Flying Dog do anything worth criticizing? I think one could make the case they didn't and the writer is off. As I understand it, the rules changed, they said that was not what they wanted to abide by, and they left. If they truly feel their names are ok, that's feels like the right response for them to me.

 
squistion said:
Shouldn't this be moved to the politics sub-forum? :hophead:

This has to do with a brand of beer with a name that is not PC (to say the least) which generally is more of a political discussion. And other free speech threads have moved to that forum.
Click to expand...
Maybe. For now it can stay here. 

 
I remember Olde Frothinslosh, the pale stale ale with the foam on the bottom.  Their label featured an obese swimsuit model. Some would find that beyond the bounds of taste.  It cracked me up a bit when I was 12.  Now, not so much.

 
Joe Bryant said:
I think maybe that's the question @IvanKaramazov  Did Flying Dog do anything worth criticizing? I think one could make the case they didn't and the writer is off. As I understand it, the rules changed, they said that was not what they wanted to abide by, and they left. If they truly feel their names are ok, that's feels like the right response for them to me.
Click to expand...
Maybe.  But even if I disagree with the writer, she's still free to make her case. 

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Maybe.  But even if I disagree with the writer, she's still free to make her case. 
Click to expand...
For sure. I think what I mean is if I think she has a case. In this instance, it feels like she was mixing charges. She was criticizing them for leaving the association. When what she really means is to criticize them for having a beer with a name that she feels is offensive. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Flying Dog has to be concerned with the federal requirements enforced by the TTB: https://www.ttb.gov/beer/labeling.shtml

They don't have to care about the BA guidelines or this blogger's meandering complaints.

Specifically regarding the beer "Raging B****" discussed in the post, Flying Dog has gone to court and won on first amendment grounds to protect its use of this tradename in at least one state - Michigan. Each state separately regulates its standards for beer labels. My guess, just as an example, is that Flying Dog probably does not sell this particular beer in Utah.

Somewhat interesting (for me anyway) - the reason they call this beer a "Belgian-Style IPA" rather than a "Belgian IPA" is specifically because of the TTB labeling regs - at section 7.23, which prohibit "Misleading brand names."  For the same reason, Central Waters had difficulty with their "Peruvian Morning" tradename. According to the TTB, the term "Beligan IPA" would confuse consumers who might think the beer is a Belgian import, while using the term "Belgian-stye IPA" is fine.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Of course. I think what I mean is if I think she has a case. In this instance, it feels like she was mixing charges. She was criticizing them for leaving the association. When what she really means is to criticize them for having a beer with a name that she feels is offensive. 
Click to expand...
Agreed. She tried to present her case in the context of not being personally offended, but really didn't have any other discernible point to make. Of course the BA can set whatever guidelines it likes, and members are free to come and go. It seems obvious the reason she wrote the piece was entirely because she is personally offended by the beer name (and others they use).

 
CletiusMaximus said:
Flying Dog has to be concerned with the federal requirements enforced by the TTB: https://www.ttb.gov/beer/labeling.shtml

They don't have to care about the BA guidelines or this blogger's meandering complaints.

Specifically regarding the beer "Raging B****" discussed in the post, Flying Dog has gone to court and won on first amendment grounds to protect its use of this tradename in at least one state - Michigan. Each state separately regulates its standards for beer labels. My guess, just as an example, is that Flying Dog probably does not sell this particular beer in Utah.

Somewhat interesting (for me anyway) - the reason they call this beer a "Belgian-Style IPA" rather than a "Belgian IPA" is specifically because of the TTB labeling regs - at section 7.23, which prohibit "Misleading brand names."  For the same reason, Central Waters had difficulty with their "Peruvian Morning" tradename. According to the TTB, the term "Beligan IPA" would confuse consumers who might think the beer is a Belgian import, while using the term "Belgian-stye IPA" is fine.
Click to expand...
Thanks @CletiusMaximus   In this case though they may (or may not) care about the association depending on what they get from it. I don't know anything about the association. It might be just a nice club to be part of. Or it might have a big impact on their business. That's a decision Flying Dog has to weigh. From what I see, they weighed out the value of the association membership against how much they wanted to keep their name and chose the name. That feels like the right way to make a decision. I may disagree with how much weight either one of those things should have. But that's their call. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
yeah  I don't believe words in general should lead to so much troublesome for people..  Being truly educated, and/or wise isn't truly a Gift..  I'm not so sure its a curse, but the expression once again is 'Ignorance is bliss'  Folks need to accept that Life shouldn't be played w/ their own rules/standards..  Don't buy the beer..  Don't patronize the establishment (whatever)  Bottom line its their monies, creations, which will pay their BILLS..  Make a better beer w a better name if ya don't get a warm fuzzy

Hope ya sorta get the jest..

I mean a argument for some folks may be..  What about calling a beer something which contains words in vain, which is talked about in the good book.  While then were broaching end of times..  (Eventually "smart" folks win/lose in a sense).  Again its just words..  It sorta goes back too Don't buy... Don't patronize..  BUT most importantly don't draw lines to cross!

 
As long as the beer companies don't stop sending posters to liquor stores with hot babes barely dressed, IDGAF what they call their beers.

 
The Association can change their rules.

The Brewery can choose to no longer belong to the Association.  

The writer can express her opinion.

All of them are free to experience whatever repercussions of their actions.

The Brewery is not under any obligation to act otherwise and to suggest to is folly.

 
Dismattle said:
yeah  I don't believe words in general should lead to so much troublesome for people..  Being truly educated, and/or wise isn't truly a Gift..  I'm not so sure its a curse, but the expression once again is 'Ignorance is bliss'  Folks need to accept that Life shouldn't be played w/ their own rules/standards..  Don't buy the beer..  Don't patronize the establishment (whatever)  Bottom line its their monies, creations, which will pay their BILLS..  Make a better beer w a better name if ya don't get a warm fuzzy

Hope ya sorta get the jest..

I mean a argument for some folks may be..  What about calling a beer something which contains words in vain, which is talked about in the good book.  While then were broaching end of times..  (Eventually "smart" folks win/lose in a sense).  Again its just words..  It sorta goes back too Don't buy... Don't patronize..  BUT most importantly don't draw lines to cross!
Click to expand...
Their next product name?

 
Dear Kaleigh

Thank you for your comments and concern.  In order to show we care, and to help share your concern, we will include your article (and your picture) in every case of Raging ##### that we sell.

Good luck with your craft beer brewery!

Truly yours

Flying Dog

:D

 
I like it Parrothead..

Heres something that could help some too comprehend some situations..  Its called Dunning–Kruger effect. 

In so many words..  Kaleigh may be full of herself, strutting high on her horse, full of something..  Who are we too disagree?

 
Joe Bryant said:
Another this might break the boards thing but this felt like an interesting intersection of a bunch of stuff we've talked about.

The gist is this:

Flying Dog Brewery has several beers with names some people consider offensive.

The Brewers Association created a standard for members that put some limitations on what brewers could use for naming their beers if they wanted to remain a member of the association.

Flying Dog Brewery said this was not cool and dropped out of the association. 

This woman wrote this article strongly criticizing Flying Dog for their actions.  

What do you think? 
Click to expand...
The problem today is that the internet gives everyone a voice. Pre-internet you had PR people controlling message and content that made it into the media.

Now, everything leaks into the media. So something like this that used to be a non-story gets blown out of proportion.

What gets me is that we as people all understand we are falliable but we expect businesses to be perfect despite the fact they're run by flawed human beings.

The Association has a right to set rules to be in said Association and Flying Dog Brewery has the right to decide whether or not they want to be in said Association.

I hate how everybody thinks they are an expert on everything nowadays. Let the businesses run their businesses! People are just looking for something to get upset about.

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
Their next product name?
Click to expand...
probably copyrighted ..  Doesn't seem like the type of business to wanna go out on an edge   deal w/ copyright infringement   Originality is their calling card

Now old girl appears quite versed, I'm sure she could come up w/ something  'farm wuzzy' w/ blanket depicted    (brewery in question, would use a farm animal)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dismattle said:
Its called Dunning–Kruger effect. 
Click to expand...
This is seriously one of my all-time favorite observations.  I worked directly under a person exactly like this for a few years (incompetent and blissfully unaware of their incompetence), and when I first stumbled upon this idea I was delighted to see that somebody had already given it a name.  I felt like I had independently discovered something cool.  

 
Eminence said:
The problem today is that the internet gives everyone a voice. Pre-internet you had PR people controlling message and content that made it into the media.

Now, everything leaks into the media. So something like this that used to be a non-story gets blown out of proportion.

What gets me is that we as people all understand we are falliable but we expect businesses to be perfect despite the fact they're run by flawed human beings.

The Association has a right to set rules to be in said Association and Flying Dog Brewery has the right to decide whether or not they want to be in said Association.

I hate how everybody thinks they are an expert on everything nowadays. Let the businesses run their businesses! People are just looking for something to get upset about.
Click to expand...
I agree with Eminence!

 
Lets also delve into the murky possibilities of the letter..

Ya see that caricature of the writer?  She is shown teeth out, in a grinding fashion..  It wouldn't shock me that out w/ "friends" she heard in dismay " Oh look, a beer named after you", at which time she was buzzed, and grew depressed about being the butt of a snarky comment. LOL

 
jon_mx said:
Are you near a hospital?  You may want to get yourself checked in.
Click to expand...
:lol:  I'm in Dallas, it's like a thousand degrees here so maybe it's clouding my judgement. Sorry Em, just kidding.

I honestly only skimmed the story but these are usually pretty boring to me. Business doing something legal but something someone doesn't like. That person posts some stuff about it, it gets picked up in our click bait society. People get to decide if they want to drink their beer, maybe some people think a bit about stuff they wouldn't have before. Everything working like it should. 

 
Quite frankly the examples were not even all that offensive.  They are creating a solution which is worse than the problem.  

 
Amused to Death said:
Founders also had an issue with their Breakfast Stout label.

Founders Breakfast Stout ban upheld by New Hampshire governor's veto
Click to expand...
Good post   Its in reference to pictures representing the product (says thick like porridge type beer)  Id speculate in 20 -100 yrs, it will be laughed at that this was actual law..

http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/new-hampshire   I'm not sure if these are related   1)You cannot sell the clothes you are wearing to pay off a gambling debt.  2)On Sundays citizens may not relieve themselves while looking up.

I kinda get the anti -kids message..  I also think this points to why drawing lines isn't much sense too

 
She lost me here:

"My name is Kaleigh Leingang. I am a 24-year-old journalism school dropout who found her way to the beer industry by accident."

If I’m calling it like I’m seeing it, your company has terminated its membership with the BA because you feel threatened. From my personal experience, men (especially men in a position of power) who feel threatened in some way have a tendency to defend what they feel entitled to to death. They’ll grab desperately at any concept that may make sense for their argument"

Typical millennial, sorry i don't want to turn this into a millennial bashing thread, that thinks her three maybe four years of "personal" experience entitle her to an opinion of "Men in Power".  I am sure in her vast experience with senior leadership in multiple disciplines have given her a unique outlook on how executive or people in power handle threatening situations.  It is good creative writing though.  She should keep doing that.

 
sbonomo said:
She lost me here:

"My name is Kaleigh Leingang. I am a 24-year-old journalism school dropout who found her way to the beer industry by accident."

If I’m calling it like I’m seeing it, your company has terminated its membership with the BA because you feel threatened. From my personal experience, men (especially men in a position of power) who feel threatened in some way have a tendency to defend what they feel entitled to to death. They’ll grab desperately at any concept that may make sense for their argument"

Typical millennial, sorry i don't want to turn this into a millennial bashing thread, that thinks her three maybe four years of "personal" experience entitle her to an opinion of "Men in Power".  I am sure in her vast experience with senior leadership in multiple disciplines have given her a unique outlook on how executive or people in power handle threatening situations.  It is good creative writing though.  She should keep doing that.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but also she men in positions of power isn't limited to senior leadership. I am sure she encounter men in power in school, college, jobs, sports, home, church, etc. Also, she did say it was her personal experience and she was upfront about how limited her experience is. At what age is someone finally allowed to make statements based on their life's  experience? 

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
The Association is entitled to their standards.  Apparently responsible adult standards.  Ultimately they may find that writing a standard is a pain as some object and many will parse the standard.

The Brewer is entitled to go leave the Association and to express his displeasure therewith.  He has a right to be puerile, juvenile, misogynistic and offensive in his speech.  If he believes that appeals to his market the business decision is his.  (Interesting whether marketing alcohol to juvenile minds under some sort of misogynistic appeal might create a new form of liability when one of his customers commits a bad act under the influence.  there are always attorneys thinking about these things.)

The writer is entitled to express her view. I thought she did so fairly well.

Myself, I enjoy an occasional dip in the juvenile pool but I do try to avoid setting up residence. 
Click to expand...
Is this how you talk in real life?  Cause that would be cool.

 
Ilov80s said:
I get your point, but also she men in positions of power isn't limited to senior leadership. I am sure she encounter men in power in school, college, jobs, sports, home, church, etc. Also, she did say it was her personal experience and she was upfront about how limited her experience is. At what age is someone finally allowed to make statements based on their life's  experience? 
Click to expand...
I think the connotation was the the leader of this brewery or a CEO type, at least this is how i took it, was the object of her argument.  That is why it lost me because i doubt she has had any experience with many people in that realm.  Honestly to make a blanket statement that most "men of power" is probably even more disturbing than anything.  Who is she to judge "Most men of power"?  Very overreaching statement in my opinion.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
sbonomo said:
I think the connotation was the the leader of this brewery or a CEO type, at least this is how i took it, was the object of her argument.  That is why it lost me because i doubt she has had any experience with many people in that realm.  Honestly to make a blanket statement that most "men of power" is probably even more disturbing than anything.  Who is she to judge "Most" men?  Very overreaching statement in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Why make some inference when she is clear what the subject of the statement was: men in position of power.

Ultimately, I agree the criticism should fall on the widespread blanket statement,  not with her age or experience (of which we don't know). 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s said:
Why make some inference when she is clear what the subject of the statement was: men in position of power.

Ultimately, I agree the criticism should fall on the widespread blanket statement,  not with her age or experience (of which we don't know). 
Click to expand...
my cut and paste failed me...updated.

 
It's easy to see why she was a journalism school dropout.   She doesn't write well and can't build a coherent argument.  Was she trying to correct him about the scope of the first amendment, or was she trying to express her offense at the name?   Flying Dog leaving the organization is a perfectly acceptable response to standards with which they disagreed.   The BA is clearly engaging in censorship, although that's their choice.   If Flying Dog's sales suffered because of the name, I'm sure they'd change it.  To the contrary, their names get attention, but if the beer sucked people wouldn't buy it twice.  The real issue is that she's offended by them monetizing sexism, which is her right.   If you don't like the name, don't buy the product.   

Seems similar to Alabama banning a wine label based on arbitrary standards, only in this instance there's less of an issue since it's a private organization.  Some people go out of their way to be offended.  

You, on the other hand, defended the right to be awarded for the use of sexism (as well as an adolescent’s understanding of sex) as a marketing tool for your company under the guise of free speech, which is a misleading interpretation of the First Amendment.
Click to expand...
This is just simply wrong in several ways.  The BA doesn't award their name, but the product.   BA won't let them participate if they don't change their name.   The use of sexism as a marketing tool is not a "misleading intepretation of the First Amendment"; it's just in the case of the BA, it's irrelevant.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
People in this country are way too easily offended in general.  You go to pretty much anywhere else in the world and this kind of thing wouldn't bother anyone.  Take Europe for example.  They show boobs on regular TV, put sex on billboards, let their kids drink a little now and then and everything's fine.  I don't know if religion is to blame for the over sensitivity in the US, going back to the Puritan ideals of long ago or what, but people should learn to relax a little more and not let stuff like this bother them.  It's not worth stressing over.  I'm sure God's not sending all the Europeans to hell over minute BS like that.  

Joe, it's one of the reasons I was so opposed to the PG-rating policy here. It forces a guy like me to stress about getting banned for 30 days for posting something "offensive" that in my opinion, shouldn't cause any sort of uproar in an environment like this. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GregR
Greg's Useless Trivia #54
Replies
14
Views
594
GregR
GregR
P
  • Locked
Liberalism and free speech
Replies
8
Views
428
Thunderlips
T
GregR
Greg's Useless Trivia #50 - 100 questions (75 greatest hits, 25 new)
Replies
19
Views
2K
GregR
GregR

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top