Connect with us

Alaska

Alaska myths, Alaska realities and Alaska beer commercials

Published

on

Alaska myths, Alaska realities and Alaska beer commercials


Part of a continuing weekly series on Alaska history by local historian David Reamer. Have a question about Anchorage or Alaska history or an idea for a future article? Go to the form at the bottom of this story.

Movies and television series set in Alaska tend to emphasize myth over reality, as myth is more of an expectation for the non-Alaskan audience. Put simply, these entertainments are not made for Alaskans. Broad appeal is understandably a greater motivation than appeasing a relatively small and isolated population. In the same way, most advertising invoking Alaska targets non-Alaskans, simply employing the positive connotations of Alaska to sell their products.

Beer advertising is a subset. As difficult as it sometimes is to imagine, far more beer is consumed outside of Alaska than within. Yet, there are some exceptions. A few brands occasionally catered directly to Alaskans. A sampling of beer advertising invoking Alaska illustrates the general rule and the few counterpoints.

Advertisement

The breweries that targeted Alaska were historically more regional than national — companies small enough that Alaska constituted a significant percentage of their market. Grab your nearest old-timer and ask about Lucky Lager, Olympia and Rainier. Lucky Lager, initially based in California but later purchased by the Canadian Labatt Brewery, was one of the best-selling beers in Alaska during its mid-twentieth-century peak. That said, longtime residents might have more fond memories of Olympia and Rainier, two companies with longer histories in Alaska.

Rainier is the older of the two brands. The beer itself launched in 1878, though the company could trace its lineage back to the founding of the Washington Brewery in 1854, the first commercial brewer in Seattle. Thus, many cases of Rainier surely made their way north in the years directly after its creation. However, both beer and Alaska took off in the wake of the Klondike gold rush.

[The terrible early television shows set in Alaska]

In Skagway, the foremost Alaska boomtown of the gold rush, Rainier was inescapable, constantly advertised and featured in the local bars. It was sold as a premium beer at a premium price and was popular despite the higher cost. In a common practice then, Rainier also directly sponsored one of the most popular and enduring Skagway bars, the Mascot Saloon. In the sponsored content of its time, contemporary articles on the Mascot Saloon often included obviously paid-for wording. For example, a 1902 inventory notice in the local newspaper announced the arrival of a keg shipment. “They contain the composition of which nothing enters but the very best of Yakima hops, toned for flavor with the close-made little sundried Bohemians and a generous quantity of malt. It is a famous, creamy brew of ample body and will be on tap at the Mascott (sic) for the next three weeks.”

And the beer was notably popular with both men and women. Early Skagway featured several bars, including the Seattle Saloon, operated by Herman Grimm. In May 1901, he announced, “A large consignment of a special brew of the famous Rainier beer has just arrived and special attention will be paid to the family trade.” By “family trade,” he meant that he would sell to women during an era when it was commonly taboo for women to enter a bar by the front entrance. Around the same time, another Skagway bar, the Mascot Saloon, offered female customers a more discreet and socially acceptable rear entrance.

Advertisement

By the midcentury, Rainier was deeply entrenched in the Alaska culture. Rainier, in turn, favored Alaskans with advertisements more earnestly targeted toward them. A series of 1950s print ads drawn by Chuck Swanberg touted Rainier as the “Inside” favorite, as opposed to more obviously Outside brewers like Budweiser or Coors. The advertisements featured illustrations of distinctly Alaska locations, like Ketchikan’s Main Street, the view approaching Juneau by ship, or the Tanana River near Fairbanks. Especially in comparison to later commercials from the corporate brewers, these drawings projected an intimate familiarity with Alaska without pandering.

Some Alaskans called it the Reindeer Beer, playing off the Rainier name. The nickname was popular enough that Rainier offered a can with a reindeer on top, exclusive to Alaska markets from 1956 to 1957. Examples of this style are considered rare now.

More Alaskans will remember the brand fondly due to its long-running “Running of the Rainiers” campaign, a fixture of 1970s and 1980s television. The commercials featured oversized Rainier bottle costumes with only the human legs sticking out. The “wild” bottles were then hunted, herded, and otherwise observed in nature. The running Rainier bottles frequently appeared in Alaska, including at Anchorage rodeos and Fur Rendezvous parades.

In this typical Rainier commercial of the era, actor Mickey Rooney stalks wild Rainiers. He is accompanied by Jim Owens, the longtime University of Washington football coach. Owens was well known in Alaska during a time when the Huskies were the closest major program, against a still-developing high school scene and before the 1976 creation of the Seattle Seahawks.

Advertisement

The first batch of Olympia reached the market on Oct. 3, 1896. A year later, amid the Klondike gold rush, there was more demand in Alaska than the company could deliver. One order included a demand for 1,000 boxes of Olympia’s Pale Export. Like Rainier, OIympia developed a closer relationship with Alaskan consumers, one spiked with humor and understanding. A representative print advertisement from 1974 offered a Fairbanks Six-Pack, a case of stubby Oly bottles with a few more than six. In their words, “Everything’s just plain bigger in Alaska.”

Then there are the other beer companies. They have repeatedly attempted to cash in on that Alaska mystique, only without the connection and lighter touch exhibited by Rainier and Olympia. A circa 1973 Schlitz commercial shows someone like a park ranger or fish and wildlife agent rescuing a moose stuck in snow. “On patrol in Alaska, helping them through the winter is more than a job; it’s a life. And that’s the only way you’d have it because you know you only go around once, and you’ve got to do it with gusto.” “Do it with gusto” was a longtime Schlitz slogan.

The general themes from the Schlitz commercial are recognizable now as well-established tropes. A rugged, overtly masculine, and noble everyman, in the course of his honest physical labors, earns a beer worthy of his archetypal qualities. The Alaska setting elevates the presentation with implications of survival and mystique.

In 1976, a Miller High Life commercial featured the trans-Alaska oil pipeline, which had already become visual shorthand for Alaska in the same way that an establishing shot of the Golden Gate Bridge is shorthand for San Francisco or the Christ the Redeemer statue is for Rio de Janeiro. In comics, cartoons, shows, and movies, the trans-Alaska pipeline is the easiest, if laziest, way to ensure the viewer understands the setting. In other words, knowing about the trans-Alaska pipeline demonstrates no special understanding of Alaska.

Advertisement

“The Alaskan Pipeline, 800 of the toughest miles man has ever conquered, and up here, quitting time is Miller Time,” the commercial said. Again, there is a connection between labor and beer as a reward. A person with a beer is thus someone who has accomplished something, a winner or conqueror. Like the Schlitz example, and in keeping with most other modern beer commercials, the Miller commercial emphasized drinking beer as a social activity. In his 1987 study of beer commercials, Neil Postman wrote, “Beer is represented as the medium through which one demonstrates one’s masculinity, is initiated into the adult world, communicates with other men, expresses feelings towards them, preserves and recaptures the history of one’s group of male friends.”

A 1985 Budweiser commercial copies the Miller High Life commercial formula, swapping in a road construction crew for pipeline workers. “Me and the crew, we’re, we’re taking this road across Alaska, and we haven’t even got to the hard part yet. I guess you could say say we’re hooking up the Last Frontier to the Lower 48. Yeah, working up here, it’s different. See, this road’s gotta be able to handle an Alaska freeze and then the thaw. But I tell you, when it’s finished, when it’s on the map, you can say, ‘we did that.’”

Here, beer is either the fuel that makes road construction possible or, once again, its reward. Alaska residents are likelier than non-residents to know there has been a road “hook up” to the Lower 48 since World War II.

Advertisement

Lastly, there is a 1987 Old Milwaukee commercial shot at Glacier Bay. “Glacier Bay, Alaska, and Old Milwaukee both mean something great to these guys. Glacier Bay means the one and only Alaskan king crab — sweet, fresh, and big. And Old Milwaukee means a great beer.” As the commercial further notes, “There’s nothing like the flavor of a special place and Old Milwaukee beer.

Outside viewers saw what they were meant to see, rugged men laboring to exhaustion before enjoying a cold beer to cap off the day. “Hey guys, it doesn’t get any better than this,” says one of the crabbers. The mountains and snow in the background provided the perfect background. These are “real men” in a “real place,” a perfected masculine form unencumbered by the frantic nature of cities, in a pure environment visibly free of pollution. And by affiliation, Old Milwaukee is understood as a decidedly authentic and pure beverage.

Any Alaskans watching the same commercial might have a different take on the display. Alaskans might scoff at the crabber working in a pristine, white cable knit sweater or the king crab pulled from a dungy pot. The full spread of a meal — with side dishes — eaten at the dock is a similarly odd visual. Needless to say, no Alaskan was convinced to switch to Old Milwaukee because of this commercial.

Commercial beer brewing in Alaska dates back to 1874, when Levi, Cohen, Fuller & Co. began service in Sitka, no matter that their entire operation was, strictly speaking, illegal. In the 150 years since, beer has been a constant presence in Alaska, again no matter any prohibitions. From 1874 Sitka through the Prinz Brau debacle to Alaskan Brewing to the rapid expansion of craft breweries, Alaskans have increasingly made their own beer, a solution for an industry largely ignorant of what actually makes Alaska unique.

Advertisement

Key sources:

“The Creamy Brew.” [Skagway] Daily Alaskan, April 23, 1902, 2.

“Did Not Buy Plant.” [Skagway] Daily Alaskan, May 3, 1901, 1.

Hellman, Matilda, Anu Katainen, and Janne Seppanen. “Gendered Citizen Constructs in Beer Commercials as Metatext of Alcohol Control Policies.” Contemporary Drug Problems 45, no. 2 (2018): 163-176.

Howell, Bill. Alaska Beer: Liquid Gold in the Land of the Midnight Sun. Charleston, SC: American Palate, 2015.

Advertisement

Ockerman, Megan Elisabeth. “‘It’s the Water’: A History of the Olympia Brewing Company, 1896-1983.” Master’s thesis, Washington State University, 2017.

Postman, Neil. Myths, Men, & Beer: An Analysis of Beer Commercials on Broadcast Television, 1987. Falls Church, VA: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 1987.

Spude, Catherine Holder. The Mascot Saloon: Archeological Investigations in Skagway, Alaska, Volume 10. Anchorage: United States Government Printing Office, Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 2005.





Source link

Advertisement

Alaska

Alaska’s voter roll transfer: Republicans bash hearing questioning if lieutenant governor broke the law

Published

on

Alaska’s voter roll transfer: Republicans bash hearing questioning if lieutenant governor broke the law


JUNEAU, Alaska (KTUU) – A legislative hearing into the legality of Alaska’s voter roll transfer to the federal government ended in partisan accusations Monday, with one Republican calling it a “set-up” and others saying it was unnecessary, while Democrats defended it as needed oversight.

“Andrew (Gray) and the committee has a bias. I mean, that much is obvious from watching it,” Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, told Alaska’s News Source walking out of the hearing before it gaveled out. “Most of the testimony was slanted against the state and against the federal government.”

The House State Affairs and Judiciary committees met jointly Monday to hear testimony about whether Dahlstrom violated the law when she transferred the entirety of Alaska’s voter rolls to the federal government.

Rep. Steve St. Clair, R-Wasilla, agreed with his Big Lake counterpart that the hearing was unnecessary.

Advertisement

“I think we’re speculating on what the intent of the DOJ is and I believe we need to wait and see,” he said.

Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage and chair of the House Judiciary Committee, pushed back when told of his Republican colleagues’ reaction.

“I think that I went above and beyond to try to include everybody,” Gray said as he left the meeting. “If people are saying that if the Obama administration had asked for the unredacted voter rolls from Alaska, that all these Republicans around here would have just been like, ‘oh, take it all. Take all of our information.’

“That is not true. That is absolutely not true,” Gray added.

Rep. Ted Eischeid, D-Anchorage, backed his House majority colleague, questioning whether Republicans would have preferred if the topic not be addressed at all.

Advertisement

“The minority folks on the committee had a chance to ask questions,” he said. “I think this is a meeting we needed to have. Alaskans have asked for it. I think there’s still a lot of unanswered questions. So shedding light on the state’s actions, that’s bias?”

Dahlstrom did not attend the hearing. Gray said she was invited multiple times but cited scheduling conflicts. The lieutenant governor oversees the Alaska Division of Elections under state law.

In her most recent public statement — published Feb. 25 on her gubernatorial campaign website, not through her official office — Dahlstrom defended the voter roll transfer, saying the agreement with the DOJ was “lawful, limited” and that Alaska retains full authority over its voter rolls.

“The DOJ cannot remove a single voter from our rolls,” she wrote. “Its role is limited to identifying potential issues, such as duplicate registrations or individuals who may have moved or passed away.”

Representatives from the state’s Department of Law and Division of Elections both testified in defense of Dahlstrom’s decision. Rachel Witty, the Department of Law’s director of legal services, told the committee the state viewed the DOJ’s purview.

Advertisement

“The DOJ’s enforcement authority is quite broad,” Witty said. “And so, we interpreted their request as being used to evaluate and enforce HAVA compliance.”

HAVA — the Help America Vote Act — is a federal law that sets election administration standards for states.

Lawmakers also heard from an assortment of outside witnesses who largely questioned the legality of Dahlstrom’s actions, including former Lt. Gov. Loren Leman, who served under Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski, and former Attorney General Bruce Botelho, who served under Democratic Gov. Tony Knowles.

The Documents: A Months-Long Timeline

As part of the hearing, the committee released months’ worth of documents between the Department of Justice — led by Attorney General Pam Bondi — and Dahlstrom’s office, detailing the effort to transfer Alaska’s voter rolls over to Washington.

The DOJ first asked Dahlstrom to release the voter rolls in July of last year, citing the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which requires states to allow federal inspection of “official lists of eligible voters.”

Advertisement

Dahlstrom agreed to release the records in August, providing a list of voters designated as “inactive” and “non-citizens,” along with their voting records and the statewide voter registration list — but it did not include what the DOJ wanted.

“As the Attorney General requested, the electronic copy of the statewide [voter registration list] must contain all fields,” reads an email sent 10 days after Dahlstrom agreed to release the data, “including the registrant’s full name, date of birth, residential address, his or her state driver’s license number or the last four digits of the registrant’s social security number.”

Dahlstrom agreed to provide the full details months later, in December, citing a state statute that permits sharing confidential information with a federal agency if it uses “the information only for governmental purposes authorized under law.” Those purposes, she wrote in the email, are to “test, analyze and assess the State’s compliance with federal laws.”

“I attach some significance to the fact that it took the State … nearly four months to respond to the Department of Justice’s demand,” former AG Botelho told the committee.

That same day, Dahlstrom, Alaska Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher and DOJ Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon signed a memorandum of understanding governing how the data could be accessed, used, and protected.

Advertisement

Dahlstrom’s office publicly announced the transfer nine days after the MOU was signed — nearly six months after the DOJ first made its request.

“Alaska is committed to the integrity of our elections and to complying with applicable law,” Dahlstrom said in the December statement. “Upon receiving the DOJ’s request, the Division of Elections, in consultation with the Department of Law, provided the voter registration list in accordance with federal requirements and state authority, while ensuring appropriate safeguards for sensitive information.”

A 10-page legal analysis from legislative counsel Andrew Dunmire, requested by House Majority Whip Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage, concluded that the DOJ’s demand defied legal bounds.

“The DOJ’s request for state voter data is unprecedented,” Dunmire’s analysis states, adding that the legal justification the DOJ used to demand access to the data has never been applied this way before.

“Multiple states refused DOJ’s request, which has resulted in litigation that is now working its way through federal courts across the country,” he adds.

Advertisement

The Senate holds an identical hearing Wednesday, when its State Affairs and Judiciary committees take up the same questions.

See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

Alaska Air National Guard rescues injured snowmachiner near Cooper Landing

Published

on

Alaska Air National Guard rescues injured snowmachiner near Cooper Landing


 

An Alaska Air National Guard HH-60W Jolly Green II helicopter, assigned to the 210th Rescue Squadron, 176th Wing, returns to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, after conducting a rescue mission for an injured snowmachiner, Feb. 21, 2026. The mission marked the first time the AKANG used the HH-60W for a rescue. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Staff Sgt. Joseph Moon)

Alaska Air National Guard personnel conducted a rescue mission Saturday, Feb. 21, after receiving a request for assistance from the Alaska State Troopers through the Alaska Rescue Coordination Center.

The mission was initiated to recover an injured snowmachiner in the Cooper Landing area, approximately 60 air miles south of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. The Alaska Air National Guard accepted the mission, located the individual, and transported them to Providence Alaska Medical Center in Anchorage for further medical care.

The mission marked the first search and rescue operation conducted by the 210th Rescue Squadron using the HH-60W Jolly Green II, the Air Force’s newest combat rescue helicopter, which is replacing the older HH-60G Pave Hawk. Guardian Angels assigned to the 212th Rescue Squadron were also aboard the aircraft and assisted in the recovery of the injured individual.

Advertisement

Good Samaritans, who were on the ground at the accident site, deployed a signal flare, that helped the helicopter crew visually locate the injured individual in the heavily wooded area.
Due to the mountainous terrain, dense tree cover, and deep snow in the area, the helicopter was unable to land near the patient. The aircrew conducted a hoist insertion and extraction of the Guardian Angels and the injured snowmachiner. The patient was extracted using a rescue strop and hoisted into the aircraft.

The Alaska Air National Guard routinely conducts search and rescue operations across the state in support of civil authorities, providing life-saving assistance in some of the most remote and challenging environments in the world.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

Alaska House advances bill to boost free legal aid for vulnerable Alaskans

Published

on

Alaska House advances bill to boost free legal aid for vulnerable Alaskans





Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending