HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >
What are you cooking today? Get great advice
TELL US

9/11 Commemorative Wines vs. Bourdain

b
bulavinaka Aug 23, 2011 08:39 PM

So another thread is piling up the posts on Deen vs. Bourdain:

http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/802719

Anthony Bourdain has to be one of the most controversial figures in food-related media - not because he has some gimmick - because he seems to say things up front - the things we all wish we could say with such a platform. Well, it doesn't take long for controversy to rear up its ugly head and of course it doesn't take much longer than that for Mr. Bourdain to slay such beasts. 9/11 commemorative wines for $19.11? C'mon, tell me this ain't real...

http://news.yahoo.com/commemorative-9...

  1. crowmuncher Aug 28, 2011 11:48 AM

    reminds me of the vendors selling 911 cookies on Rescue Me that Tommy Gavin had to put in check...

    I love you Anthony Bourdain!

    1. MVNYC Aug 26, 2011 09:10 AM

      I am hoping to capitalize here too with some commemorative beverages:

      Bataan Death March Rice Whiskey
      Armenian Genocide Raki
      Trail of Tears Bourbon
      Milosevic Merlot
      Darfur Commemorative Vodka in an AK-47 shaped bottle
      Kristallnacht Lager Beer

      1. t
        thimes Aug 26, 2011 06:04 AM

        I'm with Bourdain on this one.

        1. ipsedixit Aug 25, 2011 08:55 PM

          It's quite frustrating reading the responses bashing the winery.

          The issue isn't whether it would be better if the winery simply made a donation without any related marketing attempts.

          Of course that's the better (maybe the *optimal*) alternative.

          I think we can all agree on that. We all wish that companies were completely altruistic and noble in their efforts.

          But that's not a real alternative. That's like saying why should we put people in prison, why can't people just stop committing crimes. That's a non sequitur.

          Rather, the issue here is would it be better if the winery never put out a 9/11 commemorative bottle and no donations were made?

          Because that's the only real (and real-life) alternative to what the winery is doing in this instance -- i.e., marketing a 9/11 bottle (or bottles) and donating a portion of the proceeds and keeping the rest.

          We all want the Platonic, idealistic option of making donations with no marketing attached. Not possible.

          In the real world we have to choose -- will it be Scylla and Charybdis? Neither are ideal, but sometimes that's just the way the world works and you have to make the best of the situation.

          2 Replies
          1. re: ipsedixit
            sunshine842 Aug 26, 2011 12:44 AM

            How about a small mark on the back label saying that a percentage of sales will be donated to the foundation in recognition of the anniversary of an ugly day in history.

            1. re: sunshine842
              Withnail42 Aug 26, 2011 05:54 AM

              Exactly what I was going to say.

          2. thew Aug 25, 2011 08:41 AM

            as a NYer, who knew people in the WTC, i find it tacky in the extreme. however compared to how we gutted the constitution, how airlines stopped serving the customers and started treating us like potential perps, how fear is used to exploit and control every aspect of our lives, how we are involved in 2 discretionary imperial wars at the cost of billions of dollars and thousands of lives (and how said money is killing our budget for schools, health care, and is a drain on our economy that no candidate cares to mention) it is pretty minor

            6 Replies
            1. re: thew
              inaplasticcup Aug 25, 2011 08:42 AM

              Yes, but we get moderated if we talk about all those other things here. :P

              1. re: inaplasticcup
                thew Aug 25, 2011 08:54 AM

                thats why i started and ended with an ontopic observation - it's tacky, but minor.

                1. re: thew
                  f
                  foreverhungry Aug 25, 2011 09:12 AM

                  I agree. Tacky. Very tacky. If a company wants to donate to a good cause, go ahead, but marketing a product with a commemorative label for a tragedy is bringing tacky to a new dimension. And yes, in the grand scheme, it's minor. If Bourdain wants to blow off on it, go ahead. He's from NJ, has worked and lived in NY for decades. He regularly rants on stuff he finds tacky or dumb, and regularly gives shout-outs to stuff he finds interesting, tasty, and inventive. Par for the course here. Personally, I agree with about 90%+ of the stuff he rants on and the stuff he praises. And personally, I agree on this issue.

                  1. re: foreverhungry
                    f
                    ferret Aug 25, 2011 11:39 AM

                    He's a slightly younger, and more relatable, Andy Rooney.

                    1. re: ferret
                      f
                      foreverhungry Aug 25, 2011 01:03 PM

                      I like that comparison.

                      1. re: ferret
                        chowdom Aug 25, 2011 07:42 PM

                        Ha ha, I'll always remember this particular diatribe http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/0...

              2. j
                Janet from Richmond Aug 25, 2011 07:35 AM

                Wonder how he is going to blame this on Satan's Channel...errr...I mean the Food Network.

                1. m
                  montrealeater Aug 24, 2011 10:35 AM

                  Gonna quote Inaplasticup: "I think one of the points Bourdain is trying to make is that intent matters. This winery could just donate a percentage of its proceeds/profits to the cause without labeling its wines with 9/11, but what is the intent? The intent appears first to generate publicity for themselves, then manipulate people emotionally into buying their wine so they can first profit and then donate the *proceeds*, however they choose to define that word. I think it's fairly sickening."

                  That's basically my sentiment on this, too. Giving money to 9/11 related charities? Good, unequivocally good. But using a tragedy to market your company/products? Imo, that is gross. Just completely gross. I'm surprised this even got past the planning stage actually, when I first saw this thread I assumed it was a joke of some sort.

                  1 Reply
                  1. re: montrealeater
                    b
                    Bellachefa Aug 24, 2011 10:56 AM

                    I agree. For all the people that knew about the idea and green lighted it, including Les Halles - which is not Tony's restaurant btw, and other restaurants that jumped on board.

                    Everything about it is self serving and wrong, even if the original idea came from the best of intentions.

                    I'd love to see a list of restaurants that agreed to carry the wine.

                    I'd also love to see a list of restaurants that have dropped the wine after the publicity Bourdain made by suggesting the owners of Les Halles to drop it off their menu.

                  2. EricMM Aug 24, 2011 08:14 AM

                    This bothers me. I think the winery could have handled this in a much different way. A simple announcement of their donation would be tactful, appreciated, and also make for great publicity. This comes off, even if not intended, as exploitation. By the way, Lieb makes an excellent pinot blanc, best on LI. Can't speak for these wines, other than that I dislike merlot in general, and LI merlot in particular.

                    1 Reply
                    1. re: EricMM
                      t
                      taboo Aug 24, 2011 08:56 AM

                      The Pinot Blanc just took double gold in the NY wine classic last week. Also, the new Right Coast Red and Petit Verdot are really good. There are some GREAT restaurants and country clubs the wines are being found at in CT now.

                    2. linguafood Aug 24, 2011 07:48 AM

                      It's the American way = good ol' capitalism. You can make money out of something? You do it.

                      1. t
                        taboo Aug 24, 2011 07:45 AM

                        The intent is that the wine will be sold with profits to the Museum. Bloomberg and the Director of the 9/11 Foundation are standing behind this as well with no issue. This is a label that stands out since it is the 10th anniversary which makes it special and not in a bad way. A celebration that we as a country are better and the fact that these wines are produced and grown in NY State makes it even better. There are now 9/11 cupcakes, dog clothes, etc.... I am sure the ingredients for those products do not come from NY State or even the USA.

                        1 Reply
                        1. re: taboo
                          inaplasticcup Aug 24, 2011 08:00 AM

                          FWIW, those cupcakes and doggy duds would make me wanna puke too. :P

                        2. inaplasticcup Aug 24, 2011 07:03 AM

                          Count me among the cynics who for the most part think that dredging up memories of 9/11 for any commercial purpose, especially this many years out, smacks of exploitation.

                          I read a piece on Salon the other day by a 9/11 widow who kept talking about how she didn't want to define herself as a 9/11 widow, that she was tired of fielding press calls, and how she just wanted to get on with her life. A few people commented that perhaps she should stop fielding the calls and writing about it, then, because it actually seemed to them that she was just milking as much mileage out of it as possible, even if it came in the guise of bemoaning her attachment to the event. I agreed.

                          I think one of the points Bourdain is trying to make is that intent matters. This winery could just donate a percentage of its proceeds/profits to the cause without labeling its wines with 9/11, but what is the intent? The intent appears first to generate publicity for themselves, then manipulate people emotionally into buying their wine so they can first profit and then donate the *proceeds*, however they choose to define that word. I think it's fairly sickening.

                          1. josquared Aug 24, 2011 06:54 AM

                            I think the effort is to be commended, but perhaps the labeling and pricing are tacky?

                            It makes me wonder how much different this is really compared to something like this, which I received news about after the earthquake & tsunami in Japan (I participate in things like marathons & triathlons.) Part of the proceeds then and now go toward relief efforts, and there's clearly a reference to the event on the logo. However, I didn't see it as tacky or anything similar. Maybe it's all in the marketing, design, as well as personal perceptions?

                            http://bit.ly/nGPDfE

                            2 Replies
                            1. re: josquared
                              b
                              bulavinaka Aug 24, 2011 05:19 PM

                              The tsunami proceeds feel different to me. It's still fresh in our mind, there are people whose lives have literally been uprooted and are in desperate ways, and they truly need material help still to this day. I've given in so many ways to this effort - bake sales, pins, donation cups, eateries contributing a portion of my bill to the cause, internet fund-raising, etc.

                              This general area was also known for sake. The perfect storm here was that the many facilities - breweries, warehouses, etc., were severely damaged or wiped out. Furthermore, Japanese outside of the tsunami zone felt it wrong to be "celebrating" by drinking sake, while others in Japan were suffering. This shared grief resulted in a huge drop in sake sales - the sake from these areas that were already in the wholesale and retail pipelines were sitting, so no sales proceeds were being created which could otherwise help those in the area. So the word from the affected prefectures was to buy sake not for the sake of celebrating, but to generate income for many of the affected areas.

                              9/11 is coming up on 10 years. It doesn't feel like 10 years to me, but I know it's our generation's Pearl Harbor, similar to Japan's Hiroshima, and this kind of pain never goes away. Both of my parents are A-bomb survivors and my mom still curses Truman for pulling the trigger. With that said, I think all who feel the need to get involved and try to contribute something positive should look hard and fast at what and how they are planning to contribute. Anything short of contributing in way that offers deep honor and respect to the fallen and their families risks discounting the memories of such tragedies.

                              1. re: josquared
                                f
                                ferret Aug 25, 2011 09:06 AM

                                We're used to seeing a t-shirt or logo shirt as a symbol of raising awareness or expressing our beliefs/causes. A bottle of wine, or a 9/11 candybar or commemorative hot dog or whatever is a tenuous association with either the event it purports to commemorate or any attempt to raise awareness. It just smacks of a let's jump on the bandwagon and make a buck in the process.

                              2. j
                                jlhinwa Aug 23, 2011 10:20 PM

                                I don't see anything offensive about it. Yes, it might sound a little less gimicky if they made the price a round number instead of something with a "9.11" in it, but other than that, I cannot find any fault.

                                No doubts there will be lots of folk trying to profit from 9/11 remembrances in some way or another. This is doing so in a way that is positive and potentially financially meaningful for a charity. Good for them.

                                3 Replies
                                1. re: jlhinwa
                                  b
                                  bulavinaka Aug 23, 2011 10:24 PM

                                  You'd think Tony and I are the only ones who gag at this line of products, but maybe not?

                                  http://www.chow.com/food-news/89027/9...

                                  1. re: bulavinaka
                                    f
                                    ferret Aug 24, 2011 08:21 AM

                                    Count me in. The winery can contribute to the cause in other ways if that was their goal. This is exploitative and tasteless. What's next, "Holocaust Merlot"?

                                    1. re: bulavinaka
                                      LulusMom Aug 25, 2011 10:03 AM

                                      I'm totally with you.

                                  2. ipsedixit Aug 23, 2011 09:17 PM

                                    How is this wine "grotesque, exploitative," and "vomit inducing," per Bourdain?

                                    From the article, part of the proceeds (a minor part, but still) goes towards the 9/11 Memorial Museum Fund.

                                    How is that a bad thing?

                                    19 Replies
                                    1. re: ipsedixit
                                      b
                                      bulavinaka Aug 23, 2011 09:35 PM

                                      >>a minor part, but still<<

                                      Add together all the aspects of this product, and it seems tacky as well as smacking of exploitation to me. Maybe I'm just being overly sensitive about the issue, but it rubbed me the wrong way as well after reading this...

                                      1. re: bulavinaka
                                        ipsedixit Aug 23, 2011 09:43 PM

                                        Add together all the aspects of this product ...

                                        ____________________________

                                        What other aspects? Aside from the price ($19.11 or $9.11), what other aspects do you find tacky or exploitative?

                                        1. re: ipsedixit
                                          b
                                          bulavinaka Aug 23, 2011 09:49 PM

                                          The name/labeling, the timing.

                                          1. re: ipsedixit
                                            b
                                            bulavinaka Aug 23, 2011 10:05 PM

                                            The winery offering this wine is not my business nor do I claim to be an expert in modeling wine businesses, but 6-10% doesn't seem much. I checked the other two wineries mentioned which also offer wines for causes and they each contribute 20% and 15% respectively. Blatantly marketing something as this 9/11 wine would lead me to believe they'd be contributing a lot more than 6-10%, but that's just me. I give 5% to charities every paycheck and I'm not even a wealthy oenophile.

                                            1. re: bulavinaka
                                              ipsedixit Aug 23, 2011 10:10 PM

                                              That 6% is total sales for the winery, not just the commerative 9/11 bottles.

                                              The sales from $19.11 bottles will all go to charity.

                                              From the Yahoo article:
                                              "Lieb Cellars, meanwhile, says proceeds of all sales will go towards the National September 11 Memorial Museum. In an interview with the LA Times, the winery said that amounts to six to 10 percent of sales."

                                              1. re: ipsedixit
                                                j
                                                jlhinwa Aug 23, 2011 10:16 PM

                                                Yes, and there is a big difference between a percentage of sales vs. a percentage of profits. 6% of total winery sales is a serious commitment--to me it is a lot more than an exploitative gimmick to sell more wine.

                                                1. re: ipsedixit
                                                  b
                                                  bulavinaka Aug 23, 2011 10:16 PM

                                                  Of all sales of what? Of the commemorative wines? All of Lieb's wines out the door? For how long? I saw it differently - it's vague. So still - let's go with 6% of gross - assuming that it is the winery's total gross - is better than nothing, but all of this about the 9/11 wines still makes me want to spit for the wrong reasons.

                                                  1. re: bulavinaka
                                                    ipsedixit Aug 23, 2011 10:23 PM

                                                    We'll take a very conservative number for argument's sake, bulavinaka, and say it's 6% of profits from just the 19.11 and 9.11 bottles.

                                                    Even that amount, I think the effort should be applauded.

                                                    Why?

                                                    Because there is ultimately *some* money going to the 9/11 Memorial.

                                                    Whereas the alternative is *no* money being donated by this company.

                                                    And, yes, the winery gets some free publicity (e.g. like us debating the topic), but so what.

                                                    It's a means to an end, and in this case the ends really do justify the means (at least in my opinion).

                                                    Now, to get back on topic, how much is Bourdain donating to the 9/11 Memorial Fund? 6% of all gross revenues from No Reservations? From A Cook's Tour? From Kitchen Confidential?

                                                    1. re: ipsedixit
                                                      b
                                                      bulavinaka Aug 25, 2011 09:49 PM

                                                      >>Why?

                                                      Because there is ultimately *some* money going to the 9/11 Memorial.

                                                      Whereas the alternative is *no* money being donated by this company.<<

                                                      If this is the only way that Lieb can think of giving to this fund, I think a new heart and soul is in order. You and I see this issue diametrically opposed. I'm wishing that Lieb had more tact in their marketing, which in this case to me is everything. You seem to have no issues with it and feel this as a vehicle to contribute is fine. I don't see Scylla nor Charybdis as being the only two options, but that's just me.

                                                      Asking what Bourdain has contributed to the fund is deflecting IMHO. He's not offering 9/11 wine at at prices in series of 9s and 1s. Whether he has or not, I don't know, and I'm not sure he would disclose this either way - not his style IMHO.

                                            2. re: bulavinaka
                                              p
                                              Parrotgal Aug 25, 2011 09:00 AM

                                              It's my understanding that the Memorial Fund actually requested that the wine be so labelled. Bourdain is a pompous, self-important asshole who NEVER checks his facts or anyone else's feelings before he spouts his trash.

                                              1. re: Parrotgal
                                                linguafood Aug 25, 2011 09:08 AM

                                                Tell us how you really feel about Mr. Bourdain.

                                                1. re: linguafood
                                                  p
                                                  Parrotgal Aug 25, 2011 09:49 AM

                                                  LOL. I usually just bite my tongue and keep it to myself, because people looooove him so much, but I just couldn't take it anymore. I'm an opinionated loudmouth, just like he is, but I try to at least think before I start spouting insults.

                                                2. re: Parrotgal
                                                  b
                                                  Bellachefa Aug 25, 2011 09:55 AM

                                                  and your point is? the memorial fund should have known better. if you take a quick look, you will see that half the articles written don't even mention Tony. People are so outraged that the story has gone global and even made the headlines as far away as Australia.

                                                  1. re: Bellachefa
                                                    inaplasticcup Aug 25, 2011 09:59 AM

                                                    LOL. I was gonna say the same. Sounds like the Memorial Fund is run by at least a couple of self-aggrandizing asshats.

                                                  2. re: Parrotgal
                                                    b
                                                    bulavinaka Aug 25, 2011 06:28 PM

                                                    I don't think Bourdain needs to check the facts on this one. It's his opinion, like a lot of what he flames or praises. I did a quick search on the Memorial Fund and Lieb is this is one of many articles that are covering this story. Ignore the writer's experience/opinion (which most seem articles seem to side with Tony/me/Chow story) and you'll see some more info regarding the marketing aspects of this.

                                                    http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/shorto...

                                                    Let's assume Bordain made nothing but knee-jerk remarks about this issue without looking deeper. Put this article in front of him and let him glean the relative info - I think his response would roughly be the same.

                                                3. re: ipsedixit
                                                  tastyjon Aug 24, 2011 09:33 PM

                                                  Because if you're classy, you donate some money as a company.

                                                  If you are attention whore, you name a product after a major disaster/act of violence and then donate money.

                                                  1. re: tastyjon
                                                    sunshine842 Aug 25, 2011 10:22 AM

                                                    yup.

                                                    Bourdain makes me laugh, but I don't worship him...but I'm with him on this one.

                                                    Having worked for an attention whore/self-aggrandizing asshat who made a BFD out of how much money was donated to charity, I can also say with some certainty that I want to see the details of EXACTLY how much money they're donating to charity. It's pretty amazing how LITTLE 10% of profits turns out to be by the time the asshats get done polishing the numbers.

                                                    1. re: sunshine842
                                                      j
                                                      jlhinwa Aug 25, 2011 09:56 PM

                                                      'It's pretty amazing how LITTLE 10% of profits turns out to be by the time the asshats get done polishing the numbers.'
                                                      ---------------------
                                                      Agreed...companies can make twist their profit numbers around in all kinds of ways. The article linked about reports that they are contributing 6 to 10% of sales. Not profits.

                                                      1. re: jlhinwa
                                                        sunshine842 Aug 26, 2011 12:43 AM

                                                        I still want to know what the numbers on the check are -- and is it 6% or 10% -- that's a BIG difference.

                                                        Asshats have a way of subtracting all kinds of crap to reduce the donation to just enough to validate the claim that "I made a contribution" -- meanwhile the number isn't ever as big as they flogged it publicly to be.

                                                        Vulture marketing, morbid packaging, and just plain squicky promotions -- nope. I'll make my donation directly to the charity -- just like I usually do.

                                                Show Hidden Posts