Does the government check for political correctness when reviewing beer labels? Should they?

Here is Ghettoblaster beer. Is it politically correct? Does it or should it offend anyone? Is it any worse than Ghetto Fabulous wine?

One option is to get into a snit and lay on the outrage. Another option is to learn from it. Does “ghetto” really deride or refer to one race only? Maybe, but not the one you may think of first. Here is the origin:

1610s, “part of a city to which Jews were restricted,” especially in Italy, from It. ghetto “part of a city to which Jews are restricted,” various theories of its origin include: Yiddish get “deed of separation;” …  or It. borghetto “small section of a town” (dim. of borgo, of Germanic origin, see borough). Extended by 1899 to crowded urban quarters of other minority groups (especially blacks in U.S. cities). As an adjective by 1903 (modern slang usage from 1999). Ghetto-blaster “large, portable stereo” is from 1982.

Tags:

legally interesting/controversial

Posted in:

malt beverage, wine

Holy smokes, change really is afoot at TTB. I was startled to see these wine labels recently, with various and sundry famous politicians emblazoned all upon them, and not in the most flattering light. I suppose there is some extra latitude for parody- or caricature-type speech, and there certainly is or ought to be latitude as to political speech. But often in the past, TTB has disallowed presidentially-oriented labels. Just two years ago, the line was drawn here, as to President Obama, and this one seemed to go too far.

The abstraction, in these caricatures, seems to help, as does the absence of the full names. The Horizon Cellars Winery, of Siler City, North Carolina has a large series of the labels depicted above. We already pointed to various labels with Former President George Bush and Sarah Palin in the past, so today we elected to highlight Former Vice President Dick Cheney, President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Former President Bill Clinton.

But there are other reasons to revel in these labels. Any discussion of Joe Biden would be embarrassingly remiss without a fond recollection of that storied day when Joe Biden washed his Trans Am, in cutoffs and no shirt, out back behind the White House.

Tags:

famous, legally interesting/controversial, parody, policy, political, speech

Posted in:

wine

We thought the Rumpmeister dress was pretty short, until we saw this attire (or lack thereof). The Cabernet label, on the left, pretty much speaks for itself. The Chardonnay label has more words, and they are no less risque than the images on the Cabernet label, though they are a bit more covered. The semi-covered words say:

MEN – NO SHIRT – NO SERVICE
WOMEN – NO SHIRT – FREE BEER

Beyond that, the verbiage on the right side says:

LIQUOR – IN THE – FRONT
POKER – IN THE – REAR

We are not sure whether it’s more funny, amusing, witty, or embarrassing. It’s a little difficult to believe these went right through, way back in 2004.

Tags:

risqué, sexual

Posted in:

wine

First it was just the pants on the ground. Now there is a profusion of panties on the ground. And once again, alcohol beverages are not far from the root of the problem. Way back in April of 2009 we first uncovered this problem, and there is no sign of abatement in the time since then.

Panty Dropper is Late Harvest Zinfandel, produced and bottled by Christies of Sonoma, Inc. Liquid Panty Remover is Cherry and Raspberry Fruit Wine, produced and bottled by Alto Vineyards, of Alto Pass, Illinois.

Tags:

risqué, sexual

Posted in:

fruit wine, wine

This Malvira red wine happens to mention that the Barbera d’Alba blend is “aged in French Oak barriques … for 18-24 months.” Is there anything so troublesome about that? Maybe so. On a similar label (with a different age range), the above rejection shows that TTB would prefer that wine labels show the actual amount of age, rather than a range or guesstimate.

TTB did not cite any specific authority in the rejection above, but 27 CFR 4.38(f) would make it hard for the importer to win this argument. It says:

(f) Additional information on labels. Labels may contain information other than the mandatory label information … if such information complies with the requirements … and does not conflict with, nor in any manner qualify statements required by this part. In addition, information which is truthful, accurate, and specific, and which is neither disparaging nor misleading may appear on wine labels.

The stated range (six months on one and two months on the other) may be accurate and non-disparaging, but it’s not especially specific.

Tags:

policy, rejections

Posted in:

wine