Through the analysis of online newspaper comments posted in reaction to an article discussing “real” vs. “fake” Parmesan, this study contributes to our understanding of how class-linked distinction, masked as “good taste,” is (re)constructed in online commentary about cheese and how alignment is achieved through negative evaluative stances.
Food is both a material and symbolic resource, and food-related communication is linked to social identities, indexing power and privilege, or distinction (Bourdieu, 1984). Recent studies demonstrate how distinction is (re)constructed and normalized in and by mediatized discourse (Jaworski & Thurlow, 2017; Thurlow & Jaworski, 2017), including food discourse (Mapes, 2018). While these studies focus on media “texts” (newspaper articles, TV programs, etc.), few address the uptake, or audience’s engagement with mediatized food discourse. To begin filling this gap, this study mobilizes the analytical lens of stance (Du Bois, 2007) to interrogate how an online newspaper audience negotiates identities and ideologies in communication about food. Specifically, I analyze 560 online newspaper comments posted in reaction to a Washington Post article about whether “real” Parmesan (a generic term for the Italian trademarked cheese Parmigiano-ReggianoⓇ) can be made elsewhere, including the United States. The analysis shows that divergent evaluative stances classify the commenters into two main groups. One views authenticity as inextricably linked to geographical regions (“Parmesan cheese is Italian, and if it isn’t made in Italy then it’s not Parmesan”). The other perceives exclusive food labels as “snobbery,” would “eat local” and “rather have a quality cheese from a small business.” Both groups, however, align in their critical, derisive stances toward a “horrid,” “cheese-like” Kraft “Parmesan” that comes “in green cans,” tastes like “sawdust,” and contains “cellulose.” Moreover, by using extreme case formulations (Pomerantz, 1986; Gordon & İkizoğlu, 2017) like “most” and “never” (“Most Americans have never tasted the Italian cheese”) and positioning the “average consumer” as an uninformed “other” who buys “grated stuff in a can,” the commenters reinscribe distinction. This study contributes to our understanding of how class-linked distinction, masked as “good taste,” is (re)constructed in online comments about cheese and how alignment is achieved through negative evaluative stances.
