That's very true in theory, but the intersection of people who don't care where their rye is made and the people willing to do a blind tasting to determine their favorite has to be awfully small. I would wager that very few people proclaiming they drink Templeton for the taste are making that proclamation from a place that involves choosing it blind, in which case the quasi-deceptive marketing is clearly an influence.
In most cases I'm a live and let live person, but the thing that bugs me about the instant case is when uneducated consumers (or dishonest marketing) lump distillers like Todd Leopold who are actually making the effort to craft a special rye into the same group as the folks who only know how to buy and market mass-produced product. It's exceedingly irksome.
Preaching to the choir here! I suppose when I said that "I do agree that if the consumer doesn't care about this information and likes to drink what is in the bottle more power to him" I suppose what really meant was that if they are dumb enough to buy the hype and not learn a bit about what they are drinking then I don't feel at all sorry for them if they pay way too much for whiskey they could get elsewhere for less. In fact I would just as soon they buy "spirit" whiskey/vodka and leave the real whiskey alone! But I absolutely agree that that the label should clearly indicate what is in the bottle. But I can't make John Q. Public read it or even care.
I also wouldn't have a problem if there was some kind of practical way to take action against BS advertising. Of course that is needed for a lot more than whiskey and I don't see it happening anytime soon.
After all, as everyone knows, us "guvmint" types can't find our ass with a both hands and a map pointing the way!