Yet another back pages cultural article about something that is entirely not Canadian but instead mostly about the United States. Even the readers' comments all link this previously-unheard-of beverage back to the US. The one lonely comment by Phyllis of Alberta had to clarify that Albert is in fact in Canada but didn't mention the specific town (wouldn't want to confuse or alienate the US readership).

Surely in a country of 30+ million people spanning at least 150 years there can be a single Christmas beverage that is tied to this nation that could have been written about for this article. I would think that's why I would buy a Canadian magazine like Macleans - in the hopes that the columnists would research and write things to increase our knowledge about our own stuff. There are already dozens of US magazines that write only about US culture, I don't want to know any more about them.

Or am I expecting far too much?

I agree with Jaqueline van Voorst. All the more so because so many of the pictures were specifically about the United States and had no bearing on my life or any other Canadian I know.

I'm sorry, Tolsen: Poor selection. In both the magazine and online.

But I get it the reason for the different selection of pics. The online selection was particularly focussed on the States, especially their military, because their citizens will be doing online searches for such pictures and will discover Macleans. This generates traffic which increases revenue from the advertisement banners.

In the selection of photos for the actual magazine, you were able to put more pics of Canadian things, people like Michaëlle Jean, Peter Mackay, and Ruby Dhalla, because the magazines are bought almost solely by Canadians. In my opinion, there were still WAY too many US-focused pics in the magazine - but most Canadians would probably disagree, as they are also obsessed with the US.
IE Readers: Name three wives of Prime Ministers. Now name three wives of US presidents.

In the end, what pains me about this is that the ultimate intent of Macleans is to try to grow their market in the US by writing about the US. They toe the line between trying to convince Canadians that they represent us as a national magazine, but are really just sellouts. Like most Canadian companies who are drooling at the chance to casually dismiss our culture and embrace US culture for some money.

Macleans - you are only making yourself pathetic by trying to play both sides. Why not be unapologetically, exuberantly Canadian? Do it with excellence and not only will the whole world will buy in (the world wants to be interested in Canada), but you maintain your dignity.

But trying your best to look like Time makes most people think, "Why don't we just buy Time?"

Inglourious Basterds, a movie that revealed for the first time that it was in fact some dudes from the United States that killed Hitler in a movie theatre.
I had always believed the history books that he committed suicide. Guess they were all wrong. Thanks, Tarantino, for revealing the truth that the USA saved the world! The US is so cool and tough.

Stark.

Very cool picture.

Wow. Yet another picture of the US military - an entity that most Canadians ideologically disagree with on such a core level. Please stop promoting the States in this magazine. Please show so much less of their culture.

"Any Top 10 list is subjective" indeed, Brian D. Johnson. Well said.

So you'd think that a writer for Canada's national magazine would at least attempt then to promote our own film industry rather than focussing so intently on foreign Hollywood films just like everyone else.

Barely mentioning "Canadian" directors like James Cameron is weak.

Even the fully US magazine Slate chose Pontypool as one of 2009's best. Written and directed by Bruce McDonald from Ontario set in Ontario. Fantastic movie.

Besides that, Quebec regularly produces the best movies in the French language. They made over 20 last year, including the excellent film Polytechnique. How about educating us in some of those, instead of simply doing what everyone else does and blindly follow the US?

Obviously the US makes the most movies, but there's tonnes of media to promote those films. I buy Maclean's so I can for once read about Canadian stuff. Otherwise, why not just buy Time?