I think the reaction to Martha Stewart, among beekeepers, has two
components:

1 - She trivializes the practice of beekeeping by making it appear "chic",
something
      that one wishes to say that one does to become a member of  a certain
group.  This
      has merit, in the sense that I read her hives were established by a
"master beekeeper"
      in Connecticut.  Has she ever put together a super's worth of frames?
Or extracted honey
      on her own from at least one hive? Does she ever peruse the BeeL
postings?

2 - She gives beekeeping a higher profile than it had before, at least in
the public media.
      I think the Ulee's Gold film did more than that, particularly the fact
that came to light that
      Henry Fonda had kept bees at one time.  I seriously doubt that the
people who fixate on
      table linens and dinner table decor are the same ones who pride
themselves on using
      mis-mixed discount paint for their hive bodies and supers.

My own reaction to all of this is that she does appear to have reasonable
intentions, and that
she probably believes that beekeeping is a valuable practice worthy of
persuing, up to a point.
That point ended long before she took the step to take her company public on
the floor of the New
York stock exchange.  Beekeeping, as most beekeepers I know, provides many
more rewards
than the sort mesured in the daily fluctuations of the S&P 500.

A local beekeeper's observation hive got me interested.  Martha's program
(which I never see)
might have had the opposite effect.

/C. Crowell
Hightstown, NJ