Let them drink Charles Shaw!
November 14th, 2008
From CNN.com's Political Ticker
Ever get the feeling some people have no perspective?
Ever get the sense that some journalists get a little shrill in their pursuit of sensationalism (and, in the process, get a little sloppy with facts and too generous with opinion or fail to see how they interject their biases into the story)?
Apparently, that is the case with the folks who run CNN’s “Political Ticker”. Now they are decrying the choice of Shafer Cabernet “Hillside Select” 2003 to be poured for “leaders of the U.K., France, Russia, China, India, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey and 11 developing economies” who are in Washington D.C. to address the current economic turmoil.
Author Becky Brittain’s and coworkers’ feathers are ruffled over the price of the wine - which they report to be $499, but a cursory check with wine-searcher.com shows $325 as the highest price and $135 as the lowest. Granted, this is not petty cash and given the current economic low, some people might get touchy about this, but a little fact checking goes a long way, people. Besides, as Kendall-Jackson demonstrated recently, many producers may send their wines to the White House gratis.
The financially conscious should take heart, though: high prices reduce consumption.
Seriously, folks, this is not a case of callous and insulated bourgeois quaffing delicate elixirs while the streets burn. This is a diplomatic dinner with foreign dignitaries. The White House should serve elegant foods and wines that showcase the finer side of American culture (I make that statement with the qualifier that I’ve not had this wine and can’t say if it is fine and elegant).
Would it be more appropriate to serve Subway subs or Big Macs? The rules of hospitality and decorum dictate that one hosts their guests graciously. This choice of wine is nothing but that. I have no beef with Charles Shaw Chardonnays, but I would not pour their reds to my honored guests. Perhaps if the authors of this particular “Political Ticker” post understood wine as more than something to ” wash it all down”, they would not be trying to make a commonplace and perfectly appropriate thing salacious and somehow shameful.
This is shoddy journalism on the part of Brittain and co-workers. And to think, I urge fellow bloggers to aspire to loftier journalistic ideals. Next time I make that exhortation, remember: this is NOT the kind of writing and reporting I have in mind.
Email & Share
November 30th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
I don’t believe anyone’s suggesting that the White House serve Charles Shaw, but I can think of about a dozen “elegant wines” that “showcase the finer side of American culture” for under $40, and five or six dozen more for under $100. Should our elected leaders really make no effort to scale back their luxury consumption in times of financial strife — if only to offer some gesture of solidarity with the millions who are losing their homes and jobs?
There’s a reason the President’s salary is $400,000, well below those of the top CEOs (and other people who buy $325 bottles of Cab), and that’s because, at least in a symbolic sense, he’s supposed to be “one of us.” At a time when many Americans can’t afford to pay the rent, the President shouldn’t be spending the equivalent of some people’s rent checks on wine for dinner, no matter who’s visiting.
December 31st, 2008 at 11:12 pm
I completely agree with this article . . . state banquets should be showcasing the finest we have to offer. Any reduction in quality to give the appearance that our government is “sympathetic” to the masses’ plight is just that, an appearance. A lowering of quality on these dinners would certainly be the poorest quality food our high government officials had to eat (do you really think they make symbolic sacrifices at home where there aren’t cameras?), and when we’re going to great lengths to impress foreign dignitaries, I want the diamond-encrusted fountains spewing Dom and the parking lot paved with Rolexes (both examples are rich enough to convey affluence but crappy enough not to have lost a fine product
The President is NOT one of us, we have never been governed by a “regular guy” going back to the Founding Fathers, and his salary is likely the smallest source of income the man will receive regularly. State dinners should be constructed to engineer the correct response from Putin or Mugabe, whether it is intimidation, fellowship, or anything else. If a few cases of $325/bottle wine can in any way help prevent a $4 trillion war, then I say it’s a decent deal in monetary terms alone.
In other news, I ran across this article while drinking a nice Charles Shaw merlot. It is not the best merlot I have ever tasted, but it is far closer than I would have thought possible, for $3! Very smooth and agreeable.