October 20th, 2010 WW Editorial Staff | Letters to the Editor
 

Inbox

     
Tags:

wweek.com readers speak on… “The Oregonian Hates Foodies and Everybody Not Eating at Shari’s Right Now”

“Local establishments get reviewed and talked about because they might not be known, and might be different. Pretty much everyone knows what they’re getting at Shari’s or Taco Time, like it or not. Why not just post a review of the peanut butter and jelly sandwich you made for dinner? It might even be good, but ultimately the review serves no purpose because everyone knows what a PB&J tastes like.

The entire purpose of the article is to insult people that eat regularly at non-chain restaurants. It has no business being in any mainstream newspaper.” —Andy

“The story would have worked better…had the writer (whose work I enjoy) given us a straight homage. There is absolutely nothing wrong with loving Shari’s, or telling why and how that 3 am cup of Dutch Bros. means something to him, how it is important and even touching; he could have used the word space to show us the love and maybe even inspired some of it from us, rather than take little swipes at foodies, which don’t really work, because there is no such thing as one type of person who loves food. Or more precisely, there’s the reductive stereotype, but yelling at it is sort of a zero-sum game, right?” —Nancy

“I would class myself as a ‘foodie,’ sure. And while everyone will have their own definition of what that means, from populist to elitist, mine has always been that it means I like and will seek out tasty, well-prepared food, ideally from fresh and locally sourced ingredients.

We’re all human beings, and we have kids and jobs, and sometimes we just can’t make the effort to do the right thing. SOMETIMES. Doing that is just a necessity of modern life, and those cheapo chains can have some real, nostalgic charm. They’re consistent. They’re corporate. They’re NOTHING SPECIAL, and unless they pay for an advertising insert, why would you write about them at all?!

The problem with this article, as others have stated, is its attempt to resonate with a certain angry, white, mostly moronic subset of folks in Portland and elsewhere in Oregon who are just feeling generally put upon. In doing so, it makes an effort to claim solidarity with these folks in some sort of contrived culture war with those of us that have a brain in our heads and who honestly couldn’t care less what they do.

This is sad, but hardly surprising. The new head honcho of the paper is a right-wing fundie wacko who has hardly been low-key about his leanings or about how he plans to take the paper in a new, lowbrow direction as seen here. Staff all know it, and they’ve been leaving for reasons other than just getting canned (though there have been plenty of those).…

Time to buy a subscription to the Sunday NYT. ” ­—Mike

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 
 

 

comments powered by Disqus
 

Web Design for magazines

Close
Close
Close