Real Beer Page - Home
Real Beer Page - Home



  Library : Archives : Yankee Brew News Help : Tips 

[an error occurred while processing this directive][an error occurred while processing this directive]

Editor's Choice
- Homebrew roundtable
- BeerLog
- Weekly beer primer
- What will you pay?

Library
Real Beer Network Original Publications
   Beer Break
   BeerLog
   BEERWeek
   Beer Expedition
   Beer Hunter
   Beer Travelers
   Canadian Beer Index
   NZ Brewers Network
   Pro Brewers Page
   Protz on Beer
   RBPMail
   World of Beer

Print Publications
   Beer Notes
   Biere Mag
   Beer Passion
   BrewPub
   BrewingTechniques
   Brew Your Own
   Celebrator
   Cream City Suds
   the TASTE!

Online Brewzines
   Beer Me!
   Eric's Beer Page
   Hop Page
   Guide to Belgian Beer
   Kilkelly.com
   NM Virtual Brewpub
   Northwest BrewPage

Online Books
   How To Brew

Authors
   Will Anderson
   Stephen Beaumont
   Dan Bedell
   Bobby Bush
   Tom Ciccateri
   Janet Eldred
   Sal Emma
   Kurt Epps
   Jack Erickson
   Jeff Frane
   Gregg Glaser
   Donald Gosselin
   Stan Hieronymus
   Robert Hughey
   Michael Jackson
   Dave Kelley
   Bernie Kilkelly
   Daria Labinsky
   Martin Lodahl
   Alan Moen
   Gary Monterosso
   Ben Myers
   Marty Nachel
   John Palmer
   Craig Pinhey
   Scott Russell
   Don Scheidt
   Mark Silva
   Gregg Smith
   Richard Stueven
   Adrian Tierney-Jones
   Glen Tinseth
   Lisa Variano

Archives
   Brew Magazine
   Great Lakes Brewing News
   Malt Advocate
   Yankee Brew News

Yankee Brew News Archive

Editorial: The Rating Game

Originally Published: 10/96

By: Donald S. Gosselin

For over seven years, our editorial policy concerning reviews was unchanged. We used "descriptive" reviews of lagers, ales and ciders and left the criticism to the reader. There was sound reasoning behind this policy. Since our inception in 1989, we believed that the microbrewing industry hadn't matured to the point where it was ready for comparative criticism. As a brewspaper pioneer among microbrewing pioneers, we thought it unwise to compare a handful of microbrewed products, one against the other.

Things have changed dramatically in those seven years. What was then a handful of small breweries has now grown to over a hundred in New England alone. While this welcome growth has been phenomenal, it has not been without pitfall. As a flood of new beers have come on line, we have noticed a sharper distinction between those that strive to produce high quality beverages and those that do not. We are not alone in this observation. Readers are quick to point out the few microbreweries, brewpubs and contract brewers that fail to meet their high expectations.

One thing is certain. The birth of this industry can be attributed to one enduring concept; the public's demand for beverages of uncompromising quality. We feel strongly that the few who neglect that demand for quality can weaken the very industry they seek to prosper from. The danger is obvious -- a potential convert to our cause may be lost forever if his first microbrew falls short of his expectations.

After some internal debate, we at Yankee Brew News are scrapping our descriptive system of reviews in favor of a comparative system based on constructive criticism. Beginning with this issue, all beverages will now be compared by me or another competent member of the editorial staff in a blind-tasting format, where feasible. A scale of one (Noticeable Flaws) to four (Outstanding) will be used.

It is our hope that this new system will help us better fulfill our two most important missions; to help the consumer make an educated choice, and to help the average brewer become an outstanding one.

Donald S. Gosselin

Publisher

Search The Real Beer Library For More Articles Related To: Ratings
Search For:

Real Beer Page - Home
Real Beer Page - Home
 • Table of Contents • What's New
 • Contact Us • Link To Us
 • Advertise • Newsletter management
 • Privacy Policy • Become an Affiliate
Real Beer Library Search:
Copyright © 1994 - 2014 Real Beer Media Inc.