I saw this re-posted at Kottke.com:
Glenn Reynolds makes an interesting analogy about journalism and beer making in his new book:
Without formal training and using cheap equipment, almost anyone can do it. The quality may be variable, but the best home-brews are tastier than the stuff you see advertised during the Super Bowl. This is because big brewers, particularly in America, have long aimed to reach the largest market by pushing bland brands that offend no one. The rise of home-brewing, however, has forced them to create "micro-brews" that actually taste of something. In the same way, argues Mr Reynolds, bloggers--individuals who publish their thoughts on the internet--have shaken up the mainstream media (or MSM, in blogger parlance).
What, no "drunk on power" quip? Curiously, the Economist piece fails to mention the name of Reynolds' book, An Army of Davids, although it appears over in the right sidebar, almost camouflaged as an ad.
I'm not sure what else to say. This man has covered quite a bit of what I would have said in a very concise and witty manner.I can say that I am a fan of the microbrew. As soon as I had sampled enough of the domestic (network) watered-down stuff, I started looking for something that would appeal to my taste. As far as beers go, Lost Coast Brewery's Great White and Rogue Brewery's Dead Guy Ale are my current favorites.
I am a consumer and producer of home-brew journalism, and I am even trying to sell my wares (as well as help others sell theirs). As for beer, I have not tried it yet, but I am very eager to do so. The combinations possible are as varied as the number of people on the planet. Some will be more pleasing than others, and certain people will prefer some flavors that have been deemed not-so-pleasing by the public (or the guys with the money).