I have Google Alerts set up on certain keywords. It generally tells me when popular ranking sites are saying something about beer or real ale or pubs. Jamie Goode's wine blog generated one such alert. His post is about the judging of the British Guild of Beer Writers awards. It seems the decisions are made, so everything I write from now on goes towards next year.The trouble is I've got nearly three weeks of increasing suspense before I find out the results. It's enough to turn a man to drink. Jamie, quite rightly, gives away no secrets.
I noticed Jamie reports a couple of interesting topics that seemed to dominate the work entered. One is the good old Portman group versus BrewDog. An argument that most beer writers love to hate and hate to love with equal proportions. The other is more interesting to me.
"A recurrent theme seems to be that although CAMRA (Campaign for Real Ale) has done some good things for beer in the past, they currently seem a bit out of touch and stubbornly defensive of their own particular vision of ‘real ale’."Being one of the entrants who might have put this point across to some extent, I'm interested in why such an unbalanced view seems to dominate. It would be all to easy for me to say that it proves the point; beer writers are saying it is so, it must be true.
I'm not comfortable in saying that. I think there might also be the case that the CAMRA view might not have been well represented in the entries.
Shall we discuss?
That was a short one. Is all this twittering making me less verbose?