Josh Hermsmeyer, the guy behind the must read Pinotblogger site, has issued a challenge to all wine bloggers and will reward the winner with a prize of up to $1,000 depending upon how many respond to his call. In a nutshell, he is asking us to answer two questions:

• Why are you passionate about wine/what motivates you to blog about it?
• Is it appropriate for a wine reviewer to prescribe the ways in which a wine should be made or is their job chiefly to review what’s in the bottle?

Times being what they are, I will attempt to answer these somewhat provocative questions and perhaps give you some more insight into what makes amateur wine writers tick. Or at least how I come at this craft.

So the first question is pretty straightforward. I blog and podcast about wine because I can and like to do so. Like a lot of wine bloggers, I was the guy everyone asked for wine tips so I found it easier to just write them down and record reviews. Now I just point people here for my picks as opposed to trying to remember them at will. My podcasting got me into blogging due to the same software being used (Wordpress). It was easy to blog so I did so soon after I started to podcast in late 2004. I got into podcasting after something clicked with me in September of 2004 when I first discovered the genre. At the time there was something like 25 podcasts but no one was doing anything about wine so Winecast was born. Over the years the podcast has ebbed and flowed but I still will be posting shows and continuing until I don’t find it enjoyable. So I guess I do this because I love wine and like sharing what little I know about it. I had much the same answer a couple years back but with a slightly different spin.

The second question is a bit more complicated. I think Josh is asking this in response to Robert Parker’s recent statements about wine bloggers (or shall I say “blobbers”?). Mr. Parker has long been accused of influencing winemaking styles in order to garner higher scores which many times leads to more demand and higher prices. The biggest beneficiaries of his ratings has been the classified growths of Bordeaux but some Cali cult wines and Aussie Shiraz has benefited, too. And I don’t blame any producers for making such changes in order to get the scores. It helps sell their wine but is also something that I hope we will get away from in the next decade as Mr. Parker retires and drinks down his cellar.

Wine writers of any level should tell the story of the wine they are reviewing and not dictate what that story should be. Sometimes this is a terroir story, sometimes it’s not. For a review to communicate the essence of the wine, as much context as possible is required. I’ve not delivered on this ideal as much as I would have liked in the past but hope to help invent the new language of wine reviews going forward. We’ll see.

In the meantime, I’ll keep trying new things to communicate how a wine moves me. Wine is a living being that is in constant change. Those of us who write about it should respect this and attempt to bring all the nuances displayed in the glass into our writing.

Unless it’s plonk, of course

“There’s something happening here / What it is ain’t exactly clear…”                             — Stephen Stills, “For What It’s Worth”

I’ve been away from the blog for much of this month but have been keeping up with my reading and, oh course, tweeting. A few weeks ago Tyler Colman, who blogs as Dr Vino, posted some legitimate questions about policies at The Wine Advocate. What transpired was a discussion of wine writer ethics that at one point featured Robert Parker labeling wine blogs, “…the source of much of the misinformation,distortion,and egegious falsehoods spread with reckless abandon…”

Needless to say, I was not pleased with this comment and wrote a 3,000 word response that concluded with some advice for Mr. Parker, open letter-style. But I never published that post because I thought it would not really do anything positive except, perhaps, make me feel a bit better. Fellow bloggers Joel Vincent and Joe Roberts covered this ground a bit more diplomatically than I did, but with much the same tone.

So I was somewhat surprised to see this issue rehashed this week in the Wall Street Journal. Another discussion broke out on the subject on eBob which was somewhat capped off by a mea culpa of sorts by Mr. Parker. In my book, case closed, but I’m sure there will be some additional chatter in the blogosphere because it creates more traffic and comments.

But I think all this raises a more fundimental question; what is the future of wine writing?

Jeff Lefevere over at Good Grape made a good point about bell curves the other day and it’s clear that dominance of The Wine Advocate and other wine review newsletters is on the downward slope of the curve. Local newspapers are cutting back on wine writers even in big metros such as Los Angeles and New York. As I’ve written here before, I don’t think there is a great future for wine glossies such as the Wine Spectator and Wine Enthusiast unless they transform their business models quickly and figure out how to make money online.

So the future is wine blogs, right? Perhaps, but there are some, such as Alice Feiring, who doubt it as she recently blogged:

And who knows if wine writing will exist in any form. If what only exists is the blog world, God help us. I’m not saying that some of my colleagues don’t give great blog, but finding the knowledgeble folk who don’t have something to ’sell’ is tough. And then finding some voices who have done homework is even tougher.

Whatever the format, there will be a void in wine writing in the next decade that will be filled by new voices. With the rise of Millennials as major wine consumers, this format will no doubt be digital and presented online in several contexts (text, video, audio, mobile). The question at hand is if the serious wine consumer of the future will pay for this information or will expect this to be freely available and ad supported.

My gut tells me it will be a bit of both but I seriously doubt there will be a solo critic success story like Robert Parker. It’s not because the talent doesn’t exist but that the circumstances are vastly different than they were 30 years ago when Mr. Parker got his start. Back then you didn’t have to be independently wealthy in order to sample the top wines of the world. You could buy them and share them with friends at weekend tastings where everyone chipped in for the wines. This is how the wines for The Wine Advocate were financed along with Mr. Parker’s rather generous personal wine budget (how he talked his wife into this early on would make a great story, but I digress).

Today it is nearly impossible for the independent wine blogger to buy the sufficient amount of wine to provide the breadth of coverage required to attract enough readers to make a wine blog financially viable. Yes, we do receive samples but this alone doesn’t provide enough tasting opportunities; the reviewer still needs to travel and purchase more wines at retail. Both not easy given the current economic climate but even in better times one would have to spend at least $100,000 a year in order to review enough wines to make a serious go of it.

But I do think that several wine bloggers working together at a single blog is the future of wine writing. Each could cover a wine region or variety in depth and in aggregate this content would attract enough of an audience to sell sponsorships, drive affiliate programs and other monetization opportunities. Think Engadget but for wine.

I think we will see such a blog launch yet in 2009 and there will be several existing wine bloggers who will be convinced to write for this site as they continue to maintain their own blogs. The “Robert Parker of the future” will be a blogger but I doubt he or she will go it alone. But together, even a small team could create enough content and traffic to build the next wine publishing empire.

The time is now; the question is who will step up and try to do this first?

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Parker Brouhaha (elevage.blogspot.com)
• Conflicts of interest and all that… (wineanorak.com)
• Bloggers to Parker: Drop dead (steveheimoff.com)

Best of the wine blogosphere for April 15th through May 29th:

• News from the trenches
• Confession! Alice and Reductive Wine Writing Ethics
• Hermann J. Wiemer 2007 Dry Riesling
• Announcing TasteNY: A Virtual Exploration of New York Wine, Beer and Spirits
• Postcard from Germany: A House Divided
• Life is a Bell Curve
• Why We Owe Robert Parker
• Wine Advocate Writers Spark Ethics Debate – Wall Street Journal
• Changes in Latitude, Changes in Gratitude (Reflections on TasteCamp East)
• Tasting with Fredric: Ridge Vertical
• F.K. & the Ox-Tail & Ridge Geyserville
• What is Social Media Worth to a Winery?
• Snooth’s iPhone Application
• Thoughts on Taste Live, Twitter and online wine tasting
• How To Spit Wine
• Wine Blogging Wednesday #56: The Round-up
• It’s a Damn Cryin’ Shame! …
• Changes at The Wine Advocate? Correspondence with Parker and Miller
• The X’d files: an exchange not seen on eRobertParker.com
• 20 Things Every Wine Lover Should Do

It is rare that you see mainstream critics write about so-called “industrial wines” and most unusual when they actually say good things about them. So I was surprised to see Wine Spectator critic Jim Laube blog about an $8 California Pinot Noir a couple weeks ago. Naturally I was curious to taste the wine myself and see how close my experience would be to Mr. Laube’s. The wine in question is from the Cecchetti Wine Company marketed under the RedTree brand. I picked it up on the end-cap at my local wine store for $5.50 on sale.

I am somewhat familiar with RedTree from their Zinfandel I tasted recently. You don’t often see Zin in the less than $10 range so when I see a new entrant I try it to see if they will be giving Ravenswood a run for their money in this price category. Sorry to report that the RedTree Zin didn’t live up to expectations with over ripe blackberry fruit overwhelmed by alcohol (listed at 14.5% ABV but likely over 15%). So how could their Pinot be anything other than a light generic red wine?

I’m not sure how they did it but the 2008 RedTree Pinot Noir is an unbelievable value at the less than $6 I paid for it on sale. Even at $12 this wine would give Mark West Pinot some serious competition. Darker than most Pinot, the wine smells like you would expect with strawberry and red cherry fruit with just a hint of the earthiness associated with Pinot. Red cherry and strawberry fruit flavors complete the package finishing with supple tannins. Surprisingly correct varietal character for a Central Valley wine.

12.5% ABV
Screw Cap closure
Rating:

Buy this wine online

My buying advice is to pick up a bottle yourself and then get a case or two if you concur (my retailer had a mail-in rebate for case purchases). I don’t expect to see the same value in the next release but will definitely give it a try next year. In the meantime I’ll be buying some Petite Sirah to see if the Zin was a fluke or trend with heavier bodied reds. They also make a Cabernet, Chardonnay and Pinot Grigio.

Thanks for the tip, Jim; keep ‘em coming.

RedTree, Pinot Noir 2008

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

I’ve been thinking these past weeks about how to post a number of reviews I have in my Evernote tasting log. After experimenting with different formats I think I have arrived at a good starting point that will be refined as I go through your feedback and by just posting reviews. Since wineries have sampled more than they ever have over the past few months, many of these reviews will be disclosed as such and this got me thinking about a more formal disclosure about how I taste and review wines.

When I started 4 and a half years ago I bought all my wines at retail. I still buy a fair amount today and these wines are not labeled after the retail price I paid. Since I live in a State that likes to tax and control the sale of alcohol to the extreme, your retail price will most likely be lower. All samples provided for review are labeled after the winery suggested retail price with the “/sample” tag. For the rare case of wines tasted in tasting rooms, wine events or trade tastings I will be using a new tag, “/tasting”, to denote that I have tasted under these conditions. I usually do not post these reviews as I will be tasting a number of wines in the, “sniff, taste, spit,” routine. Wines I especially like will be tasted twice before I make notes. Most of the notes posted here with this tag will be in more controlled winery tasting room or barrel cellar conditions.

I think these disclosures are important to the reader as it shows how long I have spent with each wine before writing down my impressions. For all samples and wines bought at retail this is typically over the course of 2-3 days, in controlled conditions with and without food. After tasting, the bottles are topped with inert gas to prevent oxidation. Notes written at tastings are 2-3 minute snapshots of wines which tends to favor the most concentrated and aromatic wines which is why I typically don’t post those reviews. Usually I pick up bottles of the wines I like at tastings to taste later at home. Unless I make it clear in the review none of the wines are tasted blind. As samples accumulate from the same varietal, I will do more blind tastings and indicate this in my notes.

There are a smattering of scales used on reviews here over the years. I used a 20 point scale (1-10 with half point increments) for a while before converting to the 100-point scale (using Robert Parker’s method). Over the past several months I have exclusively used a 5-star scale I proposed for bloggers some time ago and plan to continue to use this scale going forward. I really don’t like putting a numerical rating on wines but it does provide the reader with some context even if highly subjective. I will also start posting all reviews on Snooth and linking back to each review here to help readers find these wines.

Finally, I have no formal wine education other than reading books and tasting wines on a nearly daily basis since 1982. While Malcolm Gladwell’s 10,000 hour rule might suggest I have reached some sort of expert status in evaluating wine I, like other tasters, still have a lot to learn. My intention is to continue to taste as many wines as I can exploring new varieties and regions and share what I like here. It’s really as simple as that.

Let me know if you have any questions and check out my code of ethics and samples policy posted elsewhere on the site.

Best of the wine blogosphere for March 31st through April 5th:

• Wine 2.0 Tasting @ Crushpad
• A Second Chance – Casa de Sonoma Cabernet Bottled in 1947
• Jumping the shark, or What gives a wine writer staying power?
• High ABV, Vanilla and Oak: California is the New Focus at LENNDEVOURS
• Pennsylvania Repeals Prohibition!
• Somali Pirates Take Ransom in Wine
• US Department of Agriculture Names Wine the 7th Food Group
• Venerable Bordeaux Chateau Embraces Cute Critter Label

Image via Wikipedia

I sat down yesterday to record another Quick Picks podcast but didn’t come up with a usable recording. No, it wasn’t due to some audio setting mishap or lack of a great wine to talk about but something more fundamental.

I didn’t want to read my review.

For some time now I’ve been struggling with this notion of how to make audio wine reviews informative but different than what I write. Too often, I default to the same sort of clinical reviews you see in the Wine Spectator and other wine pubs. Terse notes on color, aromas and flavors topped off with a rating on some scale. For almost 5 years now, that’s been what I’ve been doing. But I’ve had enough.

No, this is not the last post on this blog; far from it. And I will return with a podcast, probably today as I try some new ideas. But there has to be a way to do wine reviews that breaks out from the current print model. Ryan Opaz’ words keep going around in my brain; the internet should be different.

There has been some recent discussion on the subject from wine writers I respect and admire. Eric Asimov addressed this in his talk at the Symposium for Professional Wine Writers. As recounted by Alder Yarrow at Vinography, Mr. Asimov called for the abolition of the tasting note; an extreme departure from what we see now in wine writing and even podcasting. We seem compelled to communicate how a wine looks, smells and tastes. And at some level I think readers and listeners are interested in these impressions but I also think there is room to develop a new language for the wine review.

Both Asimov and Yarrow are correct in their main arguments. Eric calls for a complete rethinking of how to capture a wine in worlds and Alder suggests the addition of context is critically important. But at the end of the day, each writes about how a wine looks, smells and tastes.

There has to be another way.

But if we look at other criticism, we don’t get a lot of deviation from this model. Food critics may write about decor and service but they mainly focus on how the food looks and tastes. Music critics talk about how a song evokes emotion but are equally concerned with performance. Film critics are the only ones who seem to have a gig as tough as wine writers but tend to talk about more technical aspects of a movie: plot, dialogue, pacing, camera work and acting. So I don’t think there is a model to emulate.

Perhaps the answer will be found in the conversation here. But then again, maybe not. Whatever the result, things will be changing in my reviews. Because the internet will be different.

Best of the wine blogosphere for March 16th through March 31st:

• Top 10 Tips for Traveling Spain – Don’t Forget the TP!!
• Oops! When famous wine writers get it wrong
• PLAYMOBIL WINE BAR STIRS OUTRAGE
• Come see us at Wine 2.0 this Thursday
• Jack Keller’s Disappeared Wine Blog Update
• European Wine Bloggers Conference, 2009 – Lisbon, Portugal – Could We Be Any Prouder?
• Announcing Wine Blogging Wednesday #56: Fine Kosher Wine
• True North in the New World
• Merry Edwards Wines, Russian River Valley: Single Vineyard Pinot Noirs
• 100 Wines: A Chronicle, #16 & 17
• Dinner with Mauro and Giuseppe Mascarello
• Does It Make Sense to Cellar Wine Under $20?
• Biggest On-Line Wine Event EVER! More details…
• 2005 Viñedos y Bodegas Pablo Garnacha Cariñena Menguante
• Announcing TasteCamp EAST 2009 in Long Island Wine Country
• Chenin Blanc Comparison – Wine Blogging Wednesday
• Chilean versus Californian Wine
• Check out this wine with your mobile phone!
• The Death of Conspicuous Consumption and the Rise of the Memento
• 1989 with Luca Currado

Jeff Lefevere and I are back with another edition of the Unfiltered podcast after nearly a year in hiatus. We are joined by Tina Caputo, the Editor-in-Chief of Vineyard & Winery Management magazine, Joel Vincent, Executive Director of the OpenWine Consortium and co-founder of VinTank, and Tom Wark from Wark Communications and FERMENTATION.

Show Notes:

00:26 – Welcome & Introductions
01:18 – Wine Bloggers Conference
07:31 – American Wine Blog Awards
15:55 – Social Media & Wine
23:27 – “Robert Parker’s Bitch” video
48:58 – Tina’s Blog, The Wine Broad’s Board
49:35 – Tom’s Blog, FERMENTATION
49:51 – Jeff’s Blog, Good Grape

Production note: My recording levels were not set correctly and attempts at adjusting this in post-production introduced a lot of noise. This has been corrected for the next episode. These things happen when you don’t podcast for several months

Feedback: winecast@gmail.com
Voicemail: +1-646-495-9203 ext. 19765
http://drop.io/winecast
Copyright 2009 Acan Media, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/

 

 Standard Podcast [51:32m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

 

 Enhanced Podcast [51:32m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

This Wine Blogging Wednesday thing is becoming a problem for me. No, it’s not the themes but my lack of organization and focus to actually post on time or near to the actual event. I did my last event on the weekend after the Wednesday in question and there have been too many months where I’ve missed posting these on the day prescribed.

So in the “better late than never” category goes this entry, which I actually started last Wednesday but ran out of time to complete; my apologies to our host Remy from The Wine Case for my late entry this time, a week behind the curve. This is after sitting out the last outing (stupidly, as will become obvious in future tasting notes).

But getting back to the task at hand, this month we are challenged by Remy from Quebec City’s The Wine Case blog to taste a variety from the North and South and compare them. This can be by any measure but I thought it best to compare wines made from the same variety from different hemispheres. I also decided to turn to a white grape since I nearly always feature reds for WBW. So I picked Sauvignon Blanc, the variety from Bordeaux that travels well around the world to create interesting wines.

Sauvignon Blanc is one of those ancient varieties that seems to produce pleasing wines no matter what the style. From bone dry to sweet, the variety does well from it’s home in France to California, the valleys of Chile and the vineyards of New Zealand. DNA profiling has connected Sauvignon Blanc as the parent of the noble Cabernet Sauvignon (along with Cabernet Franc) and related to Chenin Blanc and even Traminer. This grape has a lot to tell from several angles and I hoped to be able to triangulate common characteristics from this tasting.

For my northerly selection I chose a recent sample sent from Rued Winery in Dry Creek Valley. I’m a frequent visitor to this part of Sonoma but have not had the pleasure of visiting this winery. From this, and subsequent tastings of other varieties, I will have to drop by to taste more. From the south, we have the ever reliable Kim Crawford from Marlborough, New Zealand. Unlike some wineries acquired and expanded based upon the reputation of early efforts, this brand seems to continue to deliver the goods.

But who will take this North vs. South Sauvignon Blanc showdown?

Tasting Notes:

Rued Winery, Sauvignon Blanc, Dry Creek Valley 2007  ($16/sample) – Very light straw in color with a green tinge. Citrus and stone fruit aromas with flavors of lime, grapefruit and peach finishing with a burst of acidity and nice mineral notes. A very nice California SB in a style I’d like to see more producers make. Also an excellent value. Paired well with Japanese food but would also be a natural for any seafood you’d squeeze lemon on before eating.

13.5% ABV
Synthetic closure
Rating:

Buy this wine online

Kim Crawford, Sauvignon Blanc, Marlborough 2008 ($17/sample) – Light straw in color with aromas of grapefruit, gooseberry and fresh hay. Bright grapefruit and lime flavors finishing very clean with good acidity. A reliable and food friendly SB for current drinking.

13% ABV
Screw cap closure
Rating:

Buy this wine online

So a draw this time with perhaps a slight nod to the North. It seems the northern entry was more mineral while the southern selection more herbaceous. But either would make a great pairing with spring food and are highly recommended. I look forward to next month when I will dare to publish these notes on the correct Wednesday

Check out Remy’s summary for those who posted on time.