More Evidence of the NYTimes Anti-US Bias
This is probably a trivial example, but it frosts me anyway. The NYTimes recently had a lengthy article about why English chocolate and candy bars are so much better than the same brands produced in the U.S. [h/t to BenS]. The article is titled, "The World's Best Candy Bars? English, of Course".
The article is replete with quotes from people who go way out of their way to get English versions (vs. US versions) of certain candy bars. From these instances, the writer concludes that English candy bars are better? What about all the people in the US who avoid English candy because "it tastes sort of funny"?
If English candy and chocolate is so dad-blamed good, why does Hershey still survive? And why do the US candy manufacturers (and the Chinese ones, too) continue to produce what the NYTimes considers an inferior product? Surely, if English candy is so much better, the process by which it is made should have emerged as the competitive victor in the US as well.
That fact that it hasn't suggests that perhaps most people in the US prefer the US versions of the chocolate and candy bars. And if they prefer the US versions, that suggests that in their minds, the US versions are better, despite the continuing anti-US biases of the NYTimes.
Digression and warning to readers: I have to admit that reading the article made me rush down to the corner variety store to sample a few different chocolate bars. Oh well, I can always go back on the diet tomorrow....
Addendum: Of course one might expect anti-US elitist snobs to write nonsense like the NYTimes piece. They also tend to put down things like light beer, plonk, and fast food, all of which pass the market test with flying colours.
The article is replete with quotes from people who go way out of their way to get English versions (vs. US versions) of certain candy bars. From these instances, the writer concludes that English candy bars are better? What about all the people in the US who avoid English candy because "it tastes sort of funny"?
If English candy and chocolate is so dad-blamed good, why does Hershey still survive? And why do the US candy manufacturers (and the Chinese ones, too) continue to produce what the NYTimes considers an inferior product? Surely, if English candy is so much better, the process by which it is made should have emerged as the competitive victor in the US as well.
That fact that it hasn't suggests that perhaps most people in the US prefer the US versions of the chocolate and candy bars. And if they prefer the US versions, that suggests that in their minds, the US versions are better, despite the continuing anti-US biases of the NYTimes.
Digression and warning to readers: I have to admit that reading the article made me rush down to the corner variety store to sample a few different chocolate bars. Oh well, I can always go back on the diet tomorrow....
Addendum: Of course one might expect anti-US elitist snobs to write nonsense like the NYTimes piece. They also tend to put down things like light beer, plonk, and fast food, all of which pass the market test with flying colours.
Category: Economics, Food, Media, PLO (Philistine LIberation Organization) Posted on
Thursday, July 19, 2007 at 1:25am
<< main
Case in point: I generally prefer Chicago style deep dish pizza. But when I'm in New York, I have to go to Ray's and have one of those thin, floppy slices, and I just love it. In fact, when I'm eating a slice at Ray's, there is a brief moment when I wonder why I would ever eat deep dish. But that feeling goes away when I get home.
I think that explains some of the things in the article, and perhaps some other situations as well.
BenS
I'm no expert in food compliance, but there may be regulatory issues that prevent the manufacturing of British style chocolate bars in North America.
What may seem like consumer preference may actually be government intervention. Being part owner of a regulatory compliance firm for several years has taught me that.
I rarely eat chocolate, but when I do, I get it from the British Store in Hyde Park (London, ON). It truly is a lot better.
BenS is of course referring to the brief time he spent in London when he was on his way to the Western Front during World War I. Since then of course dental care has improved considerably in Britain
In fact, as anyone who is anyone knows full well, both British and U.S. chocolate, at least of the commercial sort, is ersatz garbage. Now Belgian chocolate is the real McCoy.
That aside, I really don't understand how any reasonably intelligent person can confuse "good" and "popular".
Not sure if the same is true with candy, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Quite frankly, though, I'm a sucker for a German chocolate (plain dark, or dark with hazelnuts), as well as, very recently having discovered, an American Treasure (Dark Chocolate Truffle).
For popular, inexpensive products, these two have a whole lot of rich flavor and really nice textures.
Of course, if I had my druthers, I'd be nibbling on one of Trader Joe's Belgian bittersweet chocolate Pound Plus bars. It's the very idea of so much dark decadence in my hands that does it for me...