Karl Hahm writes the star letter in the Whisky Magazine drawing attention to the discrepancy between what some whisky companies claim in their marketing, and the reality of what they practice.

Andrew Jefford's excellent book, Peat Smoke & Spirit, also makes the same point.  Indeed, the same company's executives have, in print, directly pooh-poohed the relevance of  barley, water and maturation location and it's effect on  single malt whisky.  But the duplicity is astounding: on the one hand marine influences are condemned as an irrelevant hoax,  while in their advertising they are all too happy to exploit every possible association with Atlantic maturation, crashing waves, salt and brine influences etc.

So which is it?  A little honesty here please.

Hahm's  tongue-in-cheek  suggestions for  some money saving ideas for certain distillers are a little too close to the bone;  if only he really knew how right he was...