To understand WTH I’m talking about, there is really no substitute for reading this tweet, which contains three screenshots that will make all clear.
But to set that up, I’ll quickly explain (even though you could probably get it from context) that I was listening to one of my (formerly) favorite podcasts, TV Avalanche with Alan Sepinwall and Brian Grubb, and Alan decided to say a TV show he didn’t like was bad in the same way St. Louis style pizza is bad (he coyly avoided saying the name of the chain, but left no doubt he meant Imo’s). He described in detail what was allegedly wrong with the pizza, but then confessed he had never actually tried it! He was just going by what his wife had told him based on her college days at Wash U. I would have had no beef (heh) with his expressing this opinion had he actually, you know, tasted the pizza at least once.
Although even once might be questionable, because he (like most TV critics) balks at reviewing a TV show based on just the pilot. Usually, he tries to watch at least four episodes of a show even if he doesn’t like it from the jump. But here he had just said in his previous podcast (or maybe the one before) that his wife has awful taste in TV (but he loves her anyway, yadda yadda)…yet he’s willing to tell a national audience to stay away from St. Louis pizza based on her second-hand opinion. Then his co-host starts musing on how awful the pizza sounds, based now on third-hand testimony! :dubious:
Anyway, I didn’t think what he did was fair, and told him so–very politely, I thought. Certainly not in a way you’d think of when you hear the phrase “Twitter troll”. Now I am blocked from commenting on or even seeing his tweets! It actually makes me appreciate the moderation here a bit more, as I can’t imagine even the most trigger-happy mod finding anything objectionable in what I tweeted. Apparently criticism is just not acceptable (ironic for a critic, I’d say). :mad:
(BTW, on the pizza itself: no, it’s not as good as a New York slice or Chicago deep dish for that matter. But for my money, it’s a helluva lot better than Domino’s or Papa John’s.)
I will eat Imo’s only if nothing else is available. Including frozen pizza and grade school cafeteria pizza. Sorry, it’s not my thing. Just like pizza isn’t Imo’s thing.
Meh. He disclosed both his belief, and the facts upon which it was based. That is, he didn’t hide that his “review,” was based on a report from his wife. So listeners are free to assign whatever weight they wish to his comments.
I don’t see this as some deep breach of journalistic ethics.
I haven’t had St. Louis pizza, but I didn’t understand the conflict in the series of tweets – something about Newsradio (which was a great show!) and a pizza place, and that’s about all I got.
I’ve had Imo’s once in my life. (Same number of times I’ve tried Papa John’s) Terrible pizza. I’ve heard that St. Louis has real pizza, but if they do it ain’t Imo’s. I’ve even told people from my neck of the woods who travel to Missouri that they have to try it, just to see how bad it is.
You’re entitled to your opinion, having actually tried it. I wish I could remember what episode it was that Alan criticized a commenter for attacking the new Star Trek show without having seen it, just based on the descriptions of others. O, the irony.
The first two tweets are not a conflict. They are there to show previous interactions were congenial—i.e., there was not a preexisting feud or anything.
So “people are saying” is a fair way for an influential media figure to spread negative information about a business? When his fans hear a friend or family member is planning a trip to St. Louis, and they warn them away from Imo’s, do you think they will pass on all the context?
Anyway, I didn’t go from being a Sepinwall fan to thinking he is a jerk based on what he said in the podcast. It was because he blocked me unjustifiably. I think any reasonable person, regardless of what they think of St. Louis pizza or what they thought about Alan’s comments about it, would have to acknowledge that blocking me—someone who had periodically engaged with him in a respectful and often laudatory manner, bought his books and encouraged others to buy them—was quite an overreaction.
Imo’s is not for everyone, and some of their combinations work better than others. But it’s sort of like White Castle. You may be turned off by it most of the time, but when you’re in the right mood, it’s great.
Come to think of it, there’s probably a 98% overlap between the times you want Imo’s and the times you want White Castle.
I’ve heard that St. Louis pizza is good, and I’m willing to give it a try. I’ve also heard they put some weird kind of cheese on it, that pizzamen in Italy or New Haven or New York or Chicago would crinkle their noses at. What’s up with that?
My oldest friend is a St Louis transplant and he has always told be about how nasty Imo’s is. His in-laws all love it and they all agree that you have to have grown up on it to appreciate it. I’m going to have to try it the next time that I visit him.
I can attest that’s not necessarily so, not for everyone—that’s why in one of those tweets, I pointed out that I never had it until I was an adult.
Again, it’s not as good as other regional varieties (my favorite of all is actually Spicy Pie in Fargo-Moorhead). But it’s miles better than Dominos or Papa John’s IMO (I actually like Pizza Hut pan pizza).
But I always want White Castle, and never want Imo’s! To be honest, I do understand if you grew up with it. I like regional foods and especially local versions of pizza. But I just can’t get into that Provel shit, sorry.
ETA: I will take it over Papa John’s. And probably even Domino’s, but that’s a closer call.
St. Louis Pizza is kinda weird. I haven’t tried the “authentic” version, but I’ve had similar pizza elsewhere in the midwest. It’s a sort of crackery crust with Provel cheese. It’s hearty and good for sharing, but not exactly what you’d call classy or sophisticated. It’s probably not going to capture the hearts (or stomachs) of Chicagoans or New Yorkers.
Provel cheese. To paraphrase an old saying, For those who have tasted, no description is necessary. For those who have not, no description is possible.
I remember being in St. Louis for work and ordering a pizza from someplace, not even realizing there was such a thing as “St. Louis style pizza.” I couldn’t figure out why this disgusting pizza had white cheese whiz on it. Or at least that’s what I remember about it. It’s been a few years. Is there any validity to my memory?
I grew up in St. Louis, and I love St. Louis style pizza. Yeah, the cheese is polarizing. You don’t like provel? Great! More for me!
I like Imo’s well enough, but there are a lot of good pizza places in the area. I lived in New York for three years. The pizza was fine. I never thought it was the Platonic ideal of pizza or anything. I’d pick St. Louis style pizza over it any day.
ETA: Provel is just a blend of a few other cheeses. It may not be to your liking, but it is not a processed abomination like Cheez Whiz.
Yes! I was actually living in Chicago at the time I bought my pizza in St. Louis, and felt a sense of comfort seeing a pie familiar to my eye-- the thin, round pizza cut into squares. But, no, 'twas an abomination.
Well, it is a processed blend of cheeses. I wouldn’t quite compare it to Cheez Whiz, but it’s like those Land O’ Lakes blocks of cheeses you get at the deli. Processed cheese has its place (I love it for mac & cheese and grilled cheese sandwiches, for instance), but not so much on pizza, IMHO.
OK, maybe Cheese Whiz was a bad comparison (it’s been at least a decade). Maybe it was more like blobs of Velveeta on my pizza. Regardless, it wasn’t a pleasant pizza experience.
