Fermentation: The Daily Wine Blog

Sommelier Rated & Approved Wines

I picked up the new wine rating newsletter from VinTrust at the Recent Wine & Spirits Magazines Top 100 Tasting. VinTrust finally announced the emergence of their new publication today in a press release via BusinessWire and this spurred me to take another look at it.

VinTrusts SOMMselections consists primarily of reviews of wine with a smattering of commentary on recent Burgundy vintages, screwcaps, biodynamic farming and some other topics. But the main thrust is providing reviews of  sommelier-vetted wines for VinTrust's client base of collectors who store their wine and often procure it through VinTrust.

The most interesting thing about the new publication is not that the wines are scored on a 100 point system. That's to be expected when writing reviews for "collectors". What's interesting is how they break down the 100 Point Rating System:

Aroma...15 points
Flavor...15 points
Structure...15 points
Length...15 Points
Balance...40 Points

This is the potential number of points each element of the wine's character can achieve. This breakdown makes as much sense to me as any other well thought out system probably would. Each review also includes a few words describing each of the five elements of the wine as well as a short contextual description of the wine. So, a typical review looks like this:

------------------------------------------------
2003 Hanzell Vineyards Chardonnay
Chardonnay - Sonoma County

Aroma: mineral, ocean, white flowers, apple.........13
Flavor: lime, hazelnut, mineral, toast, apple..........14
Structure: rich, med acid, glycerous, mild tannin..14
Length: long, needs time to develop......................13
Balance: balanced and refreshing...........................37
SUGG: $65           DRINK: 2008-2018               91 Points

The palate is refreshing and rich at the same time.
The acidity and mild tannins, unusual in a California
white, aid in aging this historic white. Hanzell fans
will be pleased to note that this is a young version
of the '95 vintage.

-------------------------------------------------

The reviews are the average taken from a number of different VinTrust sommeliers' independent ratings. So, we are talking about a group effort rather than an individual's tastes.  Lisa Minucci, SOMMselection's editor describes the reviews this way:

"SOMMselections Wine Journal is a new and unique kind of wine publication that offers more objective reviews by trained wine professionals and multiple perspectives on truly special wines.”

I'm not clear how the reviews are "more objective" than others. Nor am I clear what the difference is between aroma's rated "13 points" and those rated "14" points. This of course is the major problem with a reader's perception of any wine rating that ascends beyond, say 4 or 5 stars.

The coolest thing about SOMMselection is that the reviews come from sommeliers. These folks are highly trained in the ways of wine. This is a good thing. However, I'm not sure that it's a thing that makes these reviews any more objective than those of Hank the Vacuum Cleaner Salesman. However, it does make them more informed.

A complimentary one-year subscription to the newsletter appears to located HERE. Click on the "Fall 2006--Inaugural Edition" link to get to the email form you need to fill out.

Ten (scary) Things: About Being a Wine Lover

TEN (scary) THINGS:
ABOUT BEING A WINE LOVER

10. Driving on Highway 29 in Napa Valley  (or Westside Road in the Russian River Valley) at 4pm in August.

9. The "Wine List" at Dennys

8. Attempting to get a 4 wine loving friends to agree on the definition of "terroir".

7. The reaction at the eRobert Parker Forum when you suggest Mr. Parker was wrong about a wine.

6. The reaction at the eRobertParker Forum when you suggest Jim Laube was right about a wine.

5. The Reaction at the eRobert Parker Forum when you suggest Jancis Robinson or Michael Broadbent's words be read.

4. The bloodshot, enraged eyes and snarling face of a French grapegrower when he spies you drinking a Spanish Rose in the South of France.

3. The mysterious vacuum that is the inside of Jonathan Nossiter's cranium.

2. The bubbling cauldron of heat that is a 15.5% alcohol Pinot Noir.

1. The over fermented and  sanctimonious ramblings of a certain wine blogger.

The Wine Spectator on Pinot Noir

Where does the most Wine Spectator Magazine stand on Pinot Noir?

It's a pretty broad question. So, here is the broad answer:

I took at look at the Wine Spectator's reviews of Pinot Noirs in specific regions for the vintages 2003-2005. The majority of reviews are of the 2004 vintage. So, we are talking a snapshot of the Spectator's view of the most recent vintages. I also looked at what percent of wines were rated 90 points or above (90+) and 80 or below (-80).

Burgundy:
488 Reviews
90+ = 46%
-80 = 3%

New Zealand
124 Reviews
90+ = 11%
-80  = 10%

Australia
50 Reviews
90+ = 4%
-80  = 2%

Oregon
280 Reviews
90+ = 43%
-80  = 3%

California
807 Reviews
90+ = 33%
-80  = 8%

Carneros
50 Reviews
90+ = 12%
-80  = 15%

Mendocino (Anderson Valley)
27 Reviews
90+ = 37%
-80 = 4%

California Central Coast (Monterey/Santa Lucia Highlands)
83 Reviews
90+ = 33%
-80  = 12%

California South Coast (Santa Rita, Santa Maria, Arroyo Grande, Santa Barbara)
125 Reviews
90+ = 26%
-80 = 8%

Russian River Valley
101 Reviews
90+ = 36%
-80  = 10%

WORLDWIDE
1508 Reviews
90+ = 33%
-80  = 6%

It appears the consensus view of Wine Spectator palates is that Oregon and Burgundy are spots where great Pinot Noir is most likely to be produced.

I do love looking at these kind of statistics. They paint a picture of sorts and the Spectator's Review Search Engine is very handy in getting this kind of picture. The only thing missing from this run down is pricing information. It would be fascinating to compare the number of Burgundies that come in over $60 to those in CA or OR that come in over  $60.

Wine Hiker

I love seeing this sort of thing. It's just that you don't see that much of it.

I'm talking about blogs that combine wine with another topic. Off the top of my head I can think of a few, but the Wine Hiker Witiculture Blog is really a great one.

The blog itself supports a very interesting and unique service: California Wine Hikes, a company that provides guided hiking tours through the wilderness and parks surrounding California wine country. Yes, there's apparently lots of good food and wine involved in these excursions, as it should be.

The blog though is a fascinating amalgamation of subjects, mainly on hiking and wine...but some other tidbits are thrown in there too. The writing is witty and fun, and in some cases fairly substantial. Best is this fun stuff is delivered by a dedicated blogger who is at it on nearly a daily basis.

The idea of combining wine and culinary pursuits with outdoor activity isn't new. You can find opportunities across France and Italy that will take you on walking and hiking tours of their wine country. And of course wine-related travel is hardly something new.

So, if you want to read a darn good wine-related blog or have an interest in hiking along with wine, you do want to check out Wine Hiker Witiculture.

Obsession and Reckless Consumption

Talk about getting this boy excited.

I wake up yesterday, tromp out to the lawn to pick up the Sunday papers, sit with coffee by my side and open the my favorite Sunday reading material. And what do I see? An article that brings together two of my favorite things in life: Baseball and wine.

There in my Sunday paper is an article about Tom "Terrific" Seaver, one of the best pitcher to ever throw a baseball and, apparently a grapegrower and winemaker in Napa Valley.

If you you are not a baseball fan, particularly a fan of baseball history, you can probably move on to another spot on the Internet and feel you've lost nothing. Because I'm about to gush.

First, I had no Idea that one of the greatest pitchers to ever hold a baseball was also a grapegrower ands soon to be winemaker. Apparently about 8 years ago Seaver purchases about 115 acres on Diamond Mountain in the northern Napa Valley, a region famous for it's Cabernet. Seaver found a south facing hillside on his property, called Vineyard Consultant extraordinaire Jim Barbour and put down the vineyard Seaver had apparently been looking forward to creating for more than 30 years.

So, here's a little insight into me. I'll buy this wine sight unseen. I don't personally care if it is any good or if it costs $100. What we are talking about is a kind of reverential appreciation for a guy that provokes one to spend money simply to be closer to him. It's sort of the same thing that happens to those folks who buy every last item they can find about a particular movie star they idolize. Only my reverence makes sense. Consider...

-3 time Cy Young Award Winner
-First Ballot Hall of Famer
-National League Strikeout Record for a Right Handed Pitcher
-Set the Record for the lowest ERA
-Struck out 200 or more batters in 10 Times

And now he's making wine?  Is he just trying to tease me?

It's a strange thing, isn't it. The way some folks will become another person's best customer based not on the quality of what they are selling but due to the connection you feel toward them. I'm not much of a collector. I have my obsessions. But they aren't the kind that lead me to consume recklessly. But this compulsion to want to purchase something due simply to some connection you feel you have to someone is a powerful thing. It's the reason and science behind celebrity endorsements. It's also why wineries are, or should be, very careful who they have in their tasting rooms. You never know when a visitor will feel a strong connection to the person pouring them their sample of Cabernet and become their best customers.

Tom Seaver's wine is expected to be released in 2008. I wonder if he needs a wine publicist.

Naming Names and Being Bad..Is it Good?

The post right below this one spurred on Fred Koeppel of KoeppelOnWine to make this comment:

"Tom, I know that you don't review wines on Fermentation, but you owe it to your readers and fans AND to the winery that disappointed you to tell us what the winery and the wine are. These people should understand that longtime consumers of that wine are disappointed and they should know why. It's when we DON'T speak up that such dumbing down of products continues."

He's right. We don't review wines. But his comment brings up an issue that I've never absolutely come down on one way or another: Should those who do review wines, in print or on blogs, publish Bad reviews?

Let's be clear that there is no question that a bad review of a wine is just as useful to readers as a good review. And as Fred points out, a bad review also puts a winery on notice. Both these are compelling reasons to name names and publish bad reviews. But, you might say, "why waste time talking or writing about bad wines when there are so many really good wines out there to alert a reader to?" There are a number of reasons to take this view. Why take the space to hammer a winery when you could use that space to praise another's efforts? Why piss off advertisers...or potential advertisers?

It is possible to write a review without coming straight out and saying, "this wine is no good". For example you might write:

This popular Dry Rose seems to be more in the the style of the sweet genre of "White Zinfandels". It's a crystal clear red in appearance that might be announcing a light Gamay as much as a Rose. The nose is fruity with ripe strawberries, and that's about all. On the palate there is a fleshy, soft quality with no bracing acidity that you find in many dry roses. It verges on obviously sweet and even is a bit cloying. Fresh strawberries make up the flavor. Cool this one way down before drinking.

This isn't necessarily a "bad" review of the wine. It merely tells us what to expect. Of course there's something missing isn't there. The score. With most reviewers delivering scores alongside their descriptions its pretty hard to put a score on this wine and not give away the fact that it disappointed me.  I'd have to give it 2 out of 5 Stars...at most.

If I were a wine reviewer, and if I didn't put scores or rankings alongside my descriptions, then I could publish this review. If I did use scores or rankings I'd have to decide if I wanted to publish this review at all.

Interestingly, Fred Koeppel, who wrote the comment in the post below that I reference above, IS someone who publishes lots of reviews, has been doing so for quite a long time and most certainly has encountered this issue of whether or not to publish reviews of wines that are average or less than average. In addition to his unusually extensive descriptions of wines, Fred uses what I think is the equivalent of a rough 10 points system that allows these levels of ranking:

Exceptional
Excellent +
Excellent
Very Good +
Very Good
Good +
Good

I don't recall if I've ever seen Fred describe a wine as perfect and it seems that he does not care to publish reviews of wines that are less than "good" or poor.

It's a nice compromise between simple descriptions and more emphasis on scores. But what does a description that only falls into the "good" category on Fred's rankings read like? Like this:

Gallo Family Vineyards
Twin Valley Moscato (non-vintage)
100% moscato
California

"GOOD"
For people who like a little sweetness in a wine – and I know there are pockets of you here and there – here’s a sweetheart of a moscato that features a winsome bouquet of orange blossom, jasmine, almond, peach and pear. In the mouth, it’s soft, round and slightly sweet, with peach and pear flavors and a modestly lush texture. It’s appealing in a simple way, like someone you send a valentine to in the third grade. Drink up.

I'm guessing this is not a wine that Fred is going to go out and buy for himself. In fact, I'd bet he'd be unlikely to recommend this wine to someone who likes their wines white and sweet. I could be wrong. But I don't think I am. Yet, it's not a bad review is it. It simply describes the wine.

It's a nice way to approach this business of writing about wines.

At Fred's website, KoeppelOnWine.com you can read many other reviews of wines here, here and here, as well as articles (this current article on less expensive Burgundy is a real heads up).

So what do we do about this issue of naming names, publishing bad reviews, etc? I don't know. I know I don't review wines so I don't have to care about it other than in a purely academic sense. But those of you who do publish reviews do have to think about this issue. I'd love to know how you handle it.

Rose & Reese's: A Disappointing Duo

I don't think it is a matter of simply being adverse to change, though I am a fan of stability.

That said, I really can't say how disappointed I was recently when I picked up a domestic rose that I've drunk a lot of over the years. It was, sort of, my "go to" rose: it has been truly dry, expressive of strawberries but not overly so, exhibited good acid and really was a beautiful afternoon quaffer that usually came in around 13.5% alcohol at most.

A vintage ago I bought a six bottles not even having tried it. I knew what it tasted like. It always tasted the same...that's why I bought it. But this time it had sugar in it. The hue of the wine was darker and it didn't have the structure. I drank it all. Must have been a bad or difficult year I figured.

But this vintage the wine was the same. Sweet and nearly cloying. What we have here is a deliberate change in winemaking style.

I couldn't help but think of Reese's Peanut Butter Cups.

They were my Oreo. I used to love to nipple around the edges where the chocolate layer was nice and thick and chunky, leaving the thin coating of chocolate on the top and bottom, sandwiching a firm cache of sweet peanuty buttery stuff in between. What a great candy!

But they went and changed it. I noticed this about 10 years ago. Today the Reese's outer edge coating of chocolate is a thin layer of waxiness that has no more of that chunky character. This isn't a bad batch we are talking about. It's a positive decision to make the Reese's into a lesser product.

I felt betrayed by the Reese's folks, but I'd been on their bandwagon since Little League. I've only been drinking this particular domestic Rose for about a decade. So, it's not so much a sense of betrayal I feel. Just plain old disappointment in the changeover to something different.

The Grand Jury of Wine is In...CA wins again.

It appears the French will keep at it until they get the results they want.

For 30 years a certain humiliation infested the French wine industry as a result of the "Paris Tasting of 1976" in which California wines bested the French in a taste off. With great hope for vindication, the French watched the recreation of that tasting just this year. Yet again, California wines bested the French.

Not content to be good PR practitioners and let this issue die, the French recently conducted another blind taste off against California wine. The results didn't quite pan out the way they hoped.

French wine writer Francois Mauss founded the "Grand Jury European" reportedly to create a body to counter the influence of Robert Parker. Among the first jobs of this new "Wine Jury" was to create another Taste Off between French and Californian wines that, to Mauss' view, would be more fair than previous comparisons. The tasting that occured in late September brought together 15 CA and 15 French wines, all Cabernet and Merlot-based, from the 1995 vintage.

The judges were a combination of European palates and "New World" palates.

California won again.

Of the Top Five wines determined by the entire panel  Abreu (Madrona Ranch), Beringer Private Reserve ands Pahlmeyer Propriatory Red came in 1, 2 and 3. Valandraud and Latour came in 4th and 5th. The top 10 wines consisted of 6 California wines.

Yet here's the really interesting thing. When you look at the scores given to the wines only by judges belonging to Mauss' Grand Jury European, 8 of the top ten wines are Californian.

How could this be? Xavier Planty of Chateau Guiraud, where this new judgment was held, explained the latest defeat of French wines at the hands of European palates like this:

'When tasting wines from your own area, the critical part of your brain is switched on, when tasting from another area, the pleasure part is switched on.'

I think it's pretty clear that M. Planty needs to stay away from writers if he is going to be attempting to explain why French wines don't do well against California wines.

There is a simple explanation for why the California wines come out on top: They appear to be better wines than their counterparts. There is no other explanation. And incidentally, though it should go without saying—although I won't allow that—this matter of California wines appearing to be better wines than the French wines is a function of the palates evaluating the wines, not the wines themselves.

Decanter On-line has a very very good couple of articles on this whole affair. This one lists the results, while this one looks into the lead up to the tasting. By the way, this article on the lead up to the tasting has an interesting "Tit for Tat" in the article's comment section between Francois Mauss of the Grand Jury European ands Steven Spurrier, who organized the two "Tastings of Paris." Clearly there is no love lost between these two.

There is great deal of weirdness that infuses this issue of "Old World" vs. "New World". That weirdness is wrapped up in market forces, the global economy, new styles of winemaking, extraordinary egos, and the debasement of the idea of "terroir" in the service of the protectors of old world pride. These various Old v. New World tastings are just the most obvious mistakes that result from the strange rivalries that have emerged in the past fifteen or twenty years. Though it goes unsaid, these tastings are organized with the hope that the French will be proven to produce "better" wines than California vintners. For a country that hangs its hat on the idea that "terroir", soil and a "sense of place" should be the governing consideration in evaluating a wine, this reliance of comparative tastings between CA and French wines seems rather odd, I think.

Wine Education as a Trailing Indicator

In the world of trends you've got "leading indicators" and "trailing indicators". The former tells where the trend is headed while the latter suggests where the trend has headed. Higher education is a trailing indicator.

A demonstration of this can be found in the news report that Appalachian State University in North Carolina has created a "Wine Studies" department.

Most states in the U.S. are "third tier" wine producers. That is, they are not understood to be sources of fine wine like first tier states such as California, Oregon and Washington. Yet it is states exactly like North Carolina, Virginia, Texas and Michigan, among others, that have seen tremendous growth in the number of wineries that operate in these states. You know that this trend has been recognized when higher education institutions there begin supporting the local wine industries with curriculum.

The story about Appalachian State University is an interesting one on a couple levels. The first is an observation made by Norm Oches, the secretary and education chair of the North Carolina Wine Growers Association. Oches says:

“Many people forget about the marketing part, but they should be thinking about that the day they put the plant in the ground. As many industries move outside the United States for production, the wine industry will stay put."

I've never heard it put quite this way, but Mr. Oches is correct. Local wine industry's simply can't be "outsourced". It's one of those great, bit "Duh" statements, I'll grant, but it's also the kind of statement that has political implications as outsourcing of American jobs is still a meaningful issue for many Americans. I'm thinking this observation might be something various local industries keep in mind as they fight battles against the forces that want to make it more difficult for small wineries to market their home-grown products. Rhetoric is important.

The other interesting statement in this article comes from Dr. Grant N. Holder, a chemistry professor at Appalachian State University who is working to get the program off the ground. In discussing the global nature of the wine industry he notes:

"the wine industry is very competitive, as every region of the world produces wine with the exception of the Middle East."

He should know better. I wonder why he doesn't.

Fine Wine Blogging

I don't know what the traffic stats are for the wine blog THE ZINQUISITION.

However, I do know it should be higher than it is, higher than most wine blogs in fact, given the quality of the posts that St. Vini puts together.

EXAMPLE A: GALLIC SYNDROME TO STRIKE NAPA

California's Alsace

I don't think any other growing region in California has so purposely gone out of its way to associate its climate and soils with particular varietals as the Anderson Valley and its wineries.

A few years ago, making the point that Anderson Valley was a source for unique and distinctive Pinot Noir, the Anderson Valley Winegrowers Association created the "Anderson Valley Pinot Noir Festival. It's a very good event largely because the Pinots from the region are so damn good and because the wineries that produce them are very serious about what they do.

But what I thought was the most brilliant move this organization has ever made was the launch of the "International Alsace Varietal Festival" last year. Quite simply, no region of California produces Rieslings and Gewurztraminers of the same caliber as Anderson Valley. The growers and wineries of that little appellation knew that and a number of folk in the wine industry knew that. But outside of that, it wasn't well known that Anderson Valley was California's Alsace.

The creation of the International Alsace Varietal Festival was surely created to make this fact better known.

The 2nd Annual IAVF takes place on February 3-4, 2006 in Anderson Valley,  a small valley just in from the Mendocino coast. The big day is the third when more than 20 wineries from around the globe and from Anderson Valley will pour Riesling, Gewurztraminer and Pinot Gris. In addition there are dinners and technical seminars and winery open houses.

The risk these folks take in having the festival way up in Anderson Valley is that it's a long way for people to go. They are going to really have to promote this event to get attendees up there. They do have a secret weapon, however. The Valley itself. It is stunning and it's a million miles away from Napa and Sonoma Valleys...if you know what I mean. I've yet to meet someone who visited Anderson Valley and not been converted into a die hard lover of the region. Myself included.

At Wark Communications we did some work for Handley Cellars, one of the longest winery residents of the appellation. Before that I had done some PR work for Obester, a winery that used to be there before selling it's vineyards and buildings to Goldeneye. It was always a long drive to meet with clients, but never a drive I dreaded.

If you have any affinity for Gewurztraminer, Riesling, Pinot Gris and sheer natural beauty you must attend this event. However, you need to sign up soon and get room reservations soon. Anderson Valley does not have a huge number of rooms. Of course all that means is you will need to stay somewhere on the Mendocino Coast, which isn't a bad idea in and of itself. However, the Anderson Valley Experience is not to be missed.

Organizing Wine Autobiographically?

Anyone remember that great scene in the movie "High Fidelity" in which Dick walks in on Rob (played by John Cusack) who is reorganizing his record collection?

Dick: "Doing it Chronologically?"
Rob: No
Dick: Alphabetical?
Rob: Nope
Dick: What?
Rob: Autobiographical!!
Dick: No Fucking Way.

Pretty ambitious. Organizing a record collection autobiographically. Clearly it's not how you'd organize a selection of records if you wanted to offer them for sale. However, there's no reason the organization of the selection of records for sale couldn't be done in such a way that it allowed for how people THINK about music.

The same could be said about wine.

From the marketer's perspective, particularly the retail marketer of American wines, the approach is pretty straightforward. we are a varietal people. We have been taught to think about wines as Zinfandels or Chardonnays or Pinot Noirs. Most important after that is surely price. We want to be able to look for wines that are "Under $10" or "$20 to $30".

But his kind of hierarchy hardly allows for the way all people think about wines. There is a website out there called "Mywinesdirect.com". After deciding if you want a Red or White wine, you then must determine the STYLE of wine you want to dig deeper into their selection. For reds you can choose from "Old World-Style, Versatile and Velvety, or Big and Bold." For white wines you can choose from "Crisp and Refreshing" or "Oak Aged".

This is an interesting way to go about the organization of wines, but it's clearly a limiting approach.

It seems the very best organizing must include not simply varietal and price, but also state, appellation and vintage, as well as by keyword so I can search for particular phrases or words that might be attached to the description of the wine.

Here's the thing, the best organizers of wine selection should make it very easy for me to find out quickly if they are selling a 2001 Sonoma Valley Zinfandel for Under $20 that has the word "Berry" in the description.

Winebid.com and K & L Wine Merchants both provide this kind of search mechanism. These folks are thinking about how their customers thing. Granted, both these retailers sell wine to serious wine buyers. They've built out their search capabilities to apply directly to this kind of buyer.

That said, it would be interesting to see a wine retailer organize their selection autobiographically.

I Wish I Was A Lawyer...sometimes.

I wish I was a lawyer sometimes because I'll often read something concerning a lawsuit and just not understand the intent of it.

Take a recently filed suit in Oklahoma.

In 2000 OK voters approved a new law that allowed OK wineries to sell their wines directly to OK restaurants and retailers, rather than being forced to sell their wines to a middleman wholesaler, who would then sell to the restaurants and retailers.

Fast forward to 2006. Earlier this year a federal judge ruled that it was unconstitutional for a state to allow its own wineries to do this, but not allow out of state wineries to sell directly to the states' restaurants and retailers.

As you can imagine, the wine wholesalers around the country aren't to fond of this ruling because it suggests there are in fact a number of states like OK that allow their wineries to go around the wholesalers. In many cases the wholesalers in various states have lobbied their legislators to get rid of the law that that allows in-state wineries to self distribute their wine. The wholesalers just don't want any chance that out-of-state wineries will start doing the same.

But in OK, the wholesalers have sued saying the law is unconstitutional, which it is, and that it should be taken off the books.

What I can't understand is why they are suing at all. Why not just sit tight? Isn't it possible that the judge in this lawsuit will rule that the state must "level up" and fix the statutes unconstitutional condition by allowing other wineries to ship to OK restaurants and retailers.

I'm no lawyer. And I'd be interested to hear what more legally-inclined minds see that I don't see. It just seems to this writer that if I was a wholesaler I'd let the whole things sit there and not touch the issue. At this point all the wholesalers have to worry about is OK wineries selling direct to restaurants. And that's not a lot of lost sales. Why not wait until an out-of-state winery or consortium challenges the law rather than taking the chance that the judge will rule to open up the state out CA wineries?

The WineSpectator.com: One Decade

The Wine Spectator is celebrating its 10th year in the on-line business. Wow...10 years. I recall when the Spectator first went on-line. It was fairly early in the whole process and it seems a long time back.

There were a few wine sites on the web back in '96, just not that many good ones. And there were not many winery web site. The emergence of winespectator.com gave promise to potential of wine on the web.

In early 1997 the Wine Spectator Homepage looked like this:

A decade later it looks like this.

It's difficult to tell exactly what changes have occurred. But of course many have. So, if you want to check out the WineSpectator.com they are offering a free trial for the next week. Even if you are into wine ratings the Ratings Search feature is well worth your time to sign up.

Have a Glass of Zin and Vote Your Conscience

I was watching the political talking heads this morning as I ran through the Sunday papers. And I started thinking, to what degree does it matter if the Republicans or Democrats control congress after the November elections.

As always there are local ballot initiatives that speak to the issue of wine, such as in Massachusetts where some folks seem think that selling wine in a grocery store might end up being the death knell of civilization as we know it. Yet from a national perspective I'm not sure there's much at stake. Furthermore, support for or against wine doesn't really break on party lines. There is a Congressional Wine Caucus, but it too is fairly bipartisan.

It's rare to see wine issue's come up on congress' radar. The last time we had any significant wine legislation came after 9/11 when congress passed a bill allowing wine to be shipped back to your home state after visiting a wine. But that's about it. The 21st amendment pretty much put wine and alcohol related matters in the states' hands except when the pesky commerce clause is involved.

So, it appears you are free to vote your conscience this November without having to take wine into account.

You Gotta Have "Palate Faith"

Have you noticed the sheer number of books that are written every year that are essentially there to tell you what you taste? Magazines too. Wine magazines and newsletters and food publications essentially exist to tell you what things taste like.

Sure, there's info on why things taste the way they do and what tastes best combined with what and how to make things taste a certain way. But in the end, food and wine writing is all about talking about what you taste.

When you consider that no two people have ever tasted the same thing with any guarantee they are experiencing it the same way, you realize that a great deal of "Palate Faith" is implied.

They may tell us that the 2000 Chateau Lafite has an intensity of blackberry aromas and rich, fruit forward flavors with hints of meat and sage. But what exactly is the writer talking about? My impression of the taste of sage might be entirely different than the writers. But I'll never know that for sure. I can't taste through his buds.

This becomes an increasingly problematic situation when you consider we read a number of folks using the term "sage" in relation to other wines, foods and ingredients...not to mention the actual sage leaf.

We simply trust that we are experiencing the same thing as the writers of recipes, reviewers of wine and friends with whom we share a meal with or for whom we prepare a meal.

Why, I think it is fair to ask of me, am I bring up this somewhat arcane observation? Well, I just tasted a wine that I loved. It was a Pinot Noir from California from the 1997 vintage. Upon tasting it, drinking it, and really liking it I started to look up other's observations of this wine. I found three recent tasting notes. None of them sounded like the same wine and worst of all none of the three described the wine I drank.

In fact, one reviewer described a definite bitter quality in the finish while another detected a sweet note in the finish

One writer described ripe strawberry as the dominant fruit aroma. A second writer described the aroma as primarily blackberry. Yet, I can promise you that the main aromas was CLEARLY Bing Cherry!

One writer described the wine having a robust, moderately tannic structure. Another described the wine as velvety and smooth.

There's a lesson here.

I think that lesson is that if you read wine reviews to get an idea of what a wine is like in order to decide what to buy, you are best off finding two or perhaps three reviewers who you can calibrate your palate with and not spend too much time with other reviewers. It will just complicate the process.

The other alternative is to simply assume that everyone's experiences the flavors and aromas of wine the very same way. This is sort of like the faith it takes to embrace religion. You need a lot of Palate Faith to take this route.

Idaho V. Germany? Hint: one's closer to you

My wife sometimes complains that too often I'll open a bottle of wine, sit with a half a glass or a full glass, then never touch the bottle again. It's true.

I'm interested in tasting more than I am in drinking. The exception is low alcohol Rieslings. Those I drink...all the way down to the bottom.

Yesterday night I was sucking on a 1999 von Schubert Maximim Grunhauser Abtsburg Riesling Spatlese. It's around 8% alcohol. It's a beautiful, somewhat exotic, wine that delivers that alluring petrol quality you look for in German Riesling, as well as still very fresh and ripe stone fruit flavors like peach, pear and apricot. Good stuff!!

But...as I enjoyed this quaffable bottling my desire to taste overtook me. I went looking for something to pair it with. Something similar, but different enough to pique my interest. I went digging though the closet where many of our wines quietly sit i the dark....Nothing. Until I got to the very back where I found something I have no idea how I obtained:

1998 Ste. Chapelle "Special Harvest" Johannisberg Riesling...from Idaho.

From Idaho.

I had no idea what to expect from the Idaho Riesling. I hadn't seen it in years, had never tasted it before and knew very little about the winery beyond it being one of the better known in that state.

I chilled it, uncorked it, and poured. What a GREAT surprise!!

The wine was sweet, as it should be, but carried substantial acid backbone that made it feel fresh and bright. It didn't have the same amount of petrol aromas that the von Schubert deliver, but the notes were definitely there. And the alcohol was in the neighborhood of 8%. It's a wine the compared very nicely with the German Riesling and would certainly appeal to some over the German. As I work during the day I tend to ingest coffee, Diet Pepsi and water. But these two wines could convert me into a day drinker.

That said, here's the take away: Take a chance. Look to Idaho, Missouri, Michigan, Texas, New Mexico, Massachusetts and "other" states for something different. These wines likely won't be on your retailer's shelves unless you live in those states and even then they likely won't be there in any number. But the Internet abounds with access to such wines.

I need to plug a client here, Appellation America. They probably offer more reviews of "other states" wines and focus editorially on areas outside of CA, WA, OR and NY than any other publication out there. And they deliver links to about 3,500 wineries across the country.

Give America's wineries a chance and explore what's out there. America is becoming a winemaking country with as much diversity as nearly any winemaking country on the globe.

Temptation

There is a temptation to believe that politics is corrupt, period. There's even good reason to believe that one lobbyist and one lobbying organization is just like the other. They do their darnedest to pay for results.

It's just not true. Some lobbying groups and some industries are more powerful by many degrees than most other industries.

The Wine Distribution industry is just such an industry.

The Portland Oregonian has published a story detailing the corrupt relationship between Oregon's wine and beer wholesalers lobby and politicians. (hat tip to Craig at Wine Camp Blog for alerting me to the article.)

Consider the situation in Oregon:
-A three tier system of distribution exists in Oregon that has the state giving wholesalers a virtual monopoly on the sale of beer and wine

-If a winery agrees to take on a distributor to sell its wine to restaurants and retailers the winery can not drop the distributor without paying 1000s of dollars in....well, blackmail...no matter how badly the distributor sucks at selling its wine.

Is it any surprise that the head of the Oregon Beer and Wine Distributors Association would say of the distribution system in Oregon, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

How does this kind of highly favorable situation arise? Money. Since 2002 the  Oregon Beer and Wine Distributors Association has given Oregon politicians over $1.2 Million in contributions, and that doesn count the free trips to Hawaii that a number of Oregon lawmakers took on the wholesalers' dime (they are in a bit of trouble for not reporting that little bribe donation.

The wine distribution system across America is so fouled by money doled out by wholesalers that it is unlikely it can ever be fixed. However, if it were ever fixed, it would look like this:

-Any winery or brewery could sell its product to any licensed retailer or restaurant in the country

-Any Winery or brewery could sell its product directly to any adult in America

-Any Winery or Brewer could work with any distributor in any state they wanted to

-Wineries and Brewers could choose to define by contract how long an exclusive relationship with a wholesaler would last with no penalty for leaving after the contract is up

-Any licensed retailer could sell its stock to any adult anywhere in America.

Here is a description of a level playing field. And up until a year or so ago almost the exact opposite set of circumstances existed in most states.

The problem is this: when nearly every sale of wine, beer and liquor is funneled through a very small group of wholesalers across the country, those wholesalers became wildly wealthy and their wealth is directly attributed to the states' support of their little clique. That wealth is used to purchase help politicians in the form of campaign contributions. These payoffs donations make the politicians indebted to the wholesalers meaning the current unfair state of affairs become even more solidified.

There's a move afoot to change the law in Oregon to allow out of state wineries to sell directly to Oregon retailers and restaurateurs. This kind of law demolishes much of the significance of the three tier system of winery to wholesaler to retailer. You can bet the wholesalers will bring out their big guns on this one.

It will be interesting to see if temptation gets the best of Oregon politicians.

Promoting Elegance in CA Wine

Something very encouraging and thoughtful is happening at the Wine Enthusiast Magazine. It's a trend that affects it's scoring of California wines. In a word, that trend is Elegance.

Some folks follow the scores and reviews of wines at wine publications closer than other. I fall into the "closer than others" category not so much because I want to get my hands on the high scoring wines but because these reviews and ratings do indeed drive sales.

What Steve Heimoff seems to be doing with his reviews of California wines is promoting up those wines that deliver elegance and balance over pure power, a characteristic that seems to have been in vogue and still is with many wine consumers.

Heimoff is the Wine Enthusiast's Senior Editor and the main sources of reviews of California wines. I noticed his trend of scoring up wines that he saw as balanced and "elegant" first when I closely read a set of California Syrah reviews he produced that clearly was an attempt at making a statement. Many of the most sought after Syrahs in California were rated down for being clumsy, over worked, flabby and over extracted.

This morning I was looking over a set of reviews of CA Pinots that appeared in the magazine's November 1 edition. I was looking at those Pinots that got the lowest reviews and what I found were words and phrases like this:

"Heavy an Soft"
"Sweet"
"a bit Sweet"
"a bit heavy"
"a very ripe, almost late-picked style"
"fairly full and heavy for a Pinot"
"A bit heavy and hot"
"This is ripe, super extracted and ponderous"

When looking at the highest rated wines I found words like this:

"high acidity"
"elegantly silky"
"juicy acidity"
"the delicate elegance a pinot should have"
"delicate and silky, almost weightless"
"Elegantly silky mouthfeel"
"brisk acidity"
"Texture is delicate and silky"
"high acidity and wonderful dryness"

Get where we are going with this. I don't know if Steve is attempting to make a statement, or even trying to influence wineries with his focus on elegance and acidity to the detriment of sweet, heavy and overly ripe qualities.

It's easy enough to check out Wine Enthusiasts ratings and reviews. They've revamped their website and it looks good. The review search feature, which requires a free registration, works just fine. My only complaint is I wish I could search all the reviews based on words, rather than just the criteria they allow such as appellation, vintage, varietal, score, etc.

Watchers of the wine industry have stated categorically for years that reviews influence the way wines are made, presumably because wineries want to make wines that get high scores. I think this is a the case to a degree and among some winemakers. If so, I hope they are reading Steve Heimoff's reviews in the Wine Enthusiast.

There Will Be No Uprising in Wine Country

"Everywhere you look in Napa County, you see what was once a farming and working-class socio-economic environment transformed into an upper-class enclave and tourist attractions, with baronial wine estates, hillside celebrity mansions, upscale shops and restaurants, luxurious inns, B&Bs, and hotels and extravagant cultural centers — all designed for the benefit of the “haves.” But beneath the genteel glitter, there exist harsh realities for those on the lower end of the economic ladder. While the local Hispanic population provides most of the labor for Napa’s wineries and vineyards (and also do most of the other “hard work” in the county), how many Hispanics own wineries or vineyards? And then there are the hundreds of homeless in Napa who — despite claims of self-serving public officials as to a plenitude of programs for them — receive little or no help"

The above is  portion from a letter sent to the Napa Valley Register. Headline writers at the Register somewhat accurately identified the thrust of the letter this way: "Shameful for Napa To Ignore It's Own Realities"

There is, I think, a nugget of truth in the letter writer's words that will never be completely addressed, no matter how much the Napa wine industry actively tries to do for the community. This is a shame but it is also a fascinating comment on the nature of wine country and the issue of class that does underly the American culture but is rarely discussed by either the mainstream press or community leaders.

Let's be clear about something, the vintners of Napa Valley do tremendous service for their community. the millions of dollars they've donated to health care alone is worthy of awestruck praise.

Yet it is true that the valley and town of Napa is more and more built on a foundation of upper class perspectives and upscale tourist dollars. It's equally true that it is a national symbol of the "hoity toity" set. The town of Sonoma and Healdsburg are different only insofar as they aspire to become a part of the hoity-toity destination collective but just aren't quite there yet (they will be, count on it). This reality in turn reflects on the simple act of wine drinking and those who call themselves wine lovers. Parts of the American public will always associate wine lovers with the upper class mind set or upper class wannabes.

We all know deep in our hearts, those of us who find themselves around active wine drinkers, that there is a bit of truth to this view of wine lovers. Tasting room workers know this better than most. But it is not the whole truth. Nor is it most of the truth. Like all luxury goods, wine attracts a set that can afford to indulge. It also attracts a set that works hard to indulge to the extent that it can. Ferreting out those who just really like wine from those who really like being seen to like wine is of no importance to wineries or communities that are supported by the wine industry.

I see no evidence of a substantial backlash against the grandeur that is so conspicuously on display in places like Napa Valley. Occasionally you see changes to zoning requirements that make life a bit more difficult for grape farmers, hoteliers and wine tasting rooms. But as long a the wine industry continues to make a concerted effort to give back to the community, they will not have to worry about any sort of uprising among the kind of folks that write the above letters and those that support the views of the letter writers.

This will make wine come out your nose!

There's funny, and then there is FUNNY. Click on the picture below to see FUNNY!!

 

Hat tip to the guys at The Cork Dorks, where REAL wine education for Television  is in production.

Wine 2.0

I know it sounds strange, but it strikes me that the age of new technologies, "the communications age" if you will, seems to have had a fairly small impact in the wine industry.

Yes, there is the annual Wine Industry Technology Symposium, but in general the convergence of technology and wine seems very much in the background. This makes sense, in a way. Wine is still and likely always will be an agricultural based pursuit. When folks talk about wine, they tend to talk about the juice or the grapes, not the way technology affects its production or the way technology helped get them the wine they wanted.

Yet, there are in fact a number of companies dedicated either to using new technology to sell wine as well as companies that utilize new communication technologies to change the playing field for learning and teaching about wine. At Wark Communications we work with two such companies: Inertia Beverage Group and AppellationAmerica.com.

It happens that both Inertia and Appellation America will be two of the companies taking part in what looks to be a fascinating get together: Wine 2.0.

Organized mainly by the folks at RadCru, Wine 2.0 is a networking event of wine companies using new technologies, the media and investors who want to know more about each other. Its details are:

When: November 8th
7 p.m. – 10 p.m.

Where: Varnish Fine Art Gallery and Wine Bar

Wines Provided By: Cameron Hughes Wine,
Three Thieves, Stormhoek, Medlock Ames, MORE TBA!

If you are a member of the media, a winery, or are interested in investing in a wine 2.0 type company you should consider RSVPing. Among the companies that will be in attendance are: Appellaltion America, Bottlenotes, Crushpad, Inertia Beverage Group, ProVina (the WinePod folk), RadCru and others.

"Drink your wine with a merry heart"

The subtitle of this blog is: "a blog set inside the world of wine public relations—where the media, culture and I mingle."

Today I want to focus on "culture", specifically the American culture and the way by which it has helped frame the debate over alcohol.

Consider this statement: "The drinking of alcohol is not a sin. The abuse of alcohol is a sin. And once you start drinking it, it is hard not to abuse it."

Here is a very concise and accurate description of how very important elements of the American culture have responded to alcohol over the past 300 years. One need not recount the episode of Prohibition to make the point that religion and its various manifestations has had a monumental impact on how American society has treated the question of alcohol.

The quote above comes from the Reverend Gary Rubendall of Calvary Baptist of Burleson, Texas. It is a response to the upcoming election that will decide if alcohol should be sold in their neck of the woods, where it is currently "dry". The good Reverend, besides accusing wine lovers of displeasing God, is leading a fast of believers between now and election day in November.

Now, I'm one of those people that believe members of the electorate should vote their values. I believe that religious values must inform believers how best to respond to those things we render unto Caesar. I also believe that once religious values an morals are publicly brought to bare on questions of public policy, those values and morals are open to critique. That is to say, once served up, religion is on the table for discussion...and critique.

That said, here we have an example of religion being used in such a way that will only harm those who buy the admonitions of the person espousing this particular brand of religious values. Perhaps I'm just not sufficiently schooled in Baptist values, but I fail to see how not eating adds to the debate about whether or not wine should be sold. Maybe I'm just a heathen, but I simply don't understand why a God who has so much to be concerned with when it comes to his people, that he would spend much time worrying over whether or not wine is being served with dinner.

"Fasting for me as a Christian, and other Christians, is a way to show God our commitment to this," said the Reverend.

Hmmm. That's one demanding God.

Among the many sins listed in the Bible are talking back to your parents and not being a virgin on your wedding night if you are a woman (both, by the way, are punishable by death...death by stoning to be specific). However, I fail to see where drinking is a sin listed in the Bible. What I see is this:

"Go, eat your bread with joy and drink your wine with a merry heart, because it is now that God favors your works." (Ecclesiastes 9:7)

Wine Country Gossip: Weekend edition

Fermentation has spies everywhere.

We learned today that Sir Mick Jagger took a swing into Napa Valley last night to dine at the Mich 3-star French Laundry. Thomas Keller, owner of the French Laundry was on hand for the visit from Jagger.

Jagger was seen in the company of his current object of appreciation, L'Wren Scott.

Concerned that he was in Napa Valley, Jagger apparently pointed out to the sommelier that he wanted to drink California wine, not French. (Good call, Mick!)

However, upon being presented with a local Gewurztraminer, Mick, according to our spy, protested that he  wanted a wine from Napa, NOT Europe. Apparently being thrown off by the German looking word "Gewurztraminer," It was kindly explained to the English Rock n Roll icon that they make Gewurztraminer in California too. With that explanation Mick apparantly got satisfaction.

It was further overheard by spies that Mick had a bit of a problem with the the Laundry's signature dish "Oysters and Pearls", an inspired combining of oyster and caviar served on warm savory pearl tapioca custard. It seems the idea of eating tapioca wasn't to his liking. Yet, somehow it found its way past his lips.

If you've got any good wine-related gossip please let us know. We always keep our sources confidential. (wow...this gossip stuff is fun....You don't have to say anything of substance. Just throw up some photos and mention where some notables were and what they ate! I wonder if "winegossip.com" is available.)

Wine Reviews With Only 17 Words!

Boy, have I ever gained respect over the past few days for those folks who write reviews of wines in wine magaznes and newsletters.

I've been working on a rush job for a wine catalog. Much of the writing entails describing wines. The thing is, every wine needing a description comes with a maximum word count that I can use. In many cases that word count is no more than 17 words!!

This is a very difficult task. It would be made easier had I chosen to simply offer descriptions of the wines such as: "deep purple hues, blackberry and cassis aromas, notes of cedar. Firm structure leading to long supple finish"(17 words).

However, I've made an effort to include context into the descriptions, meaning I've wanted to give the readers a sense of where the producer or the wine stand, rank or mean in the context of their category, region or history. AND, I've tried to offer some descriptive elements for the wine.

In 17 words in many cases.

If you take a look at Jim Laube's (Wine Spectator), Steve Heimoff's (Wine Enthusiast) or Joshua Greene's (Wine & Spirits Magazine) reviews you find that they average something around 30 - 35 words per review. Wine & Spirits seem to be just a tad longer than that. And in all these cases highly ranked wines are written up with more words and lower rated wines with fewer words. But look at the number of reviews these guys write.

I can't imagine this is their favorite part of the job. I could be wrong about that, since it clearly is a challenge. And, perhaps I'm taken with the difficulty of the job of describing a wine in just 17 words because I don't take into account that these folks do it all the time and likely are quite good at working in a small economy word environment. Either way, I'm impressed with how they do it.

Try it sometime. Try to write a meaningful review or description of a wine you really liked with 17 to 30 words. Try to convey your appreciation for and the character of the wine.

TEN THINGS: For Which I'd Pay Retail-Plus

10 Things for which I'd pay retail-plus

1. A searchable database of every wine-related article published in print or on the net in the past 12 months.

2. The chance to drive the Oakville Grade/Trinity Road from Napa to Sonoma in a small, fast car with a guarantee no other cars would be on the road

3. The chance to convince a winery to change it's name to "100 Points"

4. A book that deals with Time Travel as well as the book "Reply"

5. A 100 page wine magazine that devotes each monthly issue to the thorough examination of 10 different wines

6. The New Yorker Magazine (if they had a wine columnist)

7. The chance to go a year without having to listen to someone argue the Wine Spectator gives better scores to advertisers

8. Two weeks on a white sand beach where the only noises I hear are the waves, the wind rushing through the palm trees and a voice regularly repeating, "Can I get you another Margarita, Mr. Wark?"

9. Tickets to see the SF Giants win Game 7 of the World Series

10. A REALLY good $3 Cigar.

One Great Wine Tasting

My wife and I drove down to San Francisco yesterday to attend the Wine & Spirit's Magazine Top 100 tasting at the Galleria at thet San Francisco Design Center.

It was the one of the very best tastings I've been to in a long time.

While I do enjoy the Family Winemakers of California and ZAP tasting, I really need to gear up for them. They are BIG...big in a way you need to really suit up and prepare to do battle to get to the wineries' tables.

The Wine & Spirits Top 100 tasting was really a civilized affair. It was not too crowded, it was easy to taste (with the exception of the Krug table)  and the food was tremendous. But the wines...WOW

Presented were the Top 100 wineries based on Wine & Spirits' last 12 months of tasting and reviewing wines. There were wines from across the globe. It had been quite some time since I'd tasted the likes of Muga, Chapoutier, Masi, Leonetti, Quinta do Noval, Dr. Loosen, etc. They were all there.

This was the third year that Wine & Spirits has held this tasting. I don't know if they limit the numbers who can attend. If they don't, they will soon need a much larger space.

This Winemaker Needs His Meds

I think it was Christopher Hitchens who said, and I paraphrase, "Assertions offered with no evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

I was thinking about this, and other things, as I read this amazing comment from Michel Rolland, the French wine consultant who was recently profiled by Eric Asimov in the NY Times:

Eric: I mention Clos du Val and Corison, two Napa Valley producers whose wines adhere to a less upfront, more austere style

Rolland: “Are they as successful in the marketplace? No,”

We could dismiss this comment out of hand because it comes with no support. However, I can't bring myself to do that.

Basically, Rolland was defending the notion that wine is best when it does not exhibit any characteristics that would place it as originating from some specific wine growing region on the globe, but rather is identifiable as a very specific style of wine that seems to be favored by certain wine critics and winemaking consultants.

As disturbing as this idea is, here's something that's even more disturbing. In suggesting that Corison and Clos du Val are not successful in the marketplace, Rolland is defining the marketplace as the pages of Robert Parker's Wine Advocate and The Wine Spectator Magazine.

No one doubts that M. Rolland is a talented winemaker. However, it's now equally clear that M. Rolland understands nothing about "the marketplace". It's as though Rolland is one of those mentally ill sort who we treat kindly and with meds after observing that they believe every action in the world revolves around them...leading them to blurt out insane words. You have to wonder what kind of voices he is hearing.

Asimov remains so restrained upon hearing Rolland write off two very successful Napa wineries that there is nothing left to do but admire Asimov's instincts. By not commenting on Rolland's vulgar insult and (momentary?) disconnect with reality, Asimov seems to understand that this kind of statement is akin to Jack Nicholson's character in "A Few Good Men" when he belts out "Of course I ordered the Code Red!" Nothing needs to be said. We are stunned into silence by the self-indictment brought on by hubris and a complete disconnect from reality.

I don't think I like Michel Rolland very much. I don't think he'd make a good dinner companion. Nor do I think he's a very nice man. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't treat him with compassion and get him some meds.

I Got a Bottle of Wine---What that Means

I received a bottle of 2004 Bishop's Peak Rock Solid Red from the UPS man today. Brian Talley sent it to me with information about the wine. It was sent in the hopes that I would review it. (Thank you very much, Brian!) There a few things I want to say about this.

First, I want to say upfront that I do not review wine at Fermentation: The Daily Wine Blog. The reasons are many, but let me hit the highlights. First, being in public relations and working with a number of wineries I would be stumbling upon a huge conflict of interest if I started passing judgment on the wines of my clients competitors. This is not to say that I've not bumped up against conflicts of interest on other issues while writing. However, the kind of conflict of interest that results from reviewing wine I simply must avoid.

I'm pretty sure I would increase my readership if I reviewed wines here on a regular basis. As it is now, the reader ship of this blog tends to be heavily skewed toward those in the wine industry or on its periphery. By reviewing wines, I'd certainly have a better shot at broadening that readership with more consumers looking for advice on what to buy. I'll just have to leave those readers on the table.

Second, I'm not convinced that my palate is anywhere near as good as many other bloggers or wine reviewers out there who do review wine on a regular basis. Let's face it, does the world need another mediocre palate telling others what to buy? I don't think so, particularly when there are so many astoundingly talented people a the wine glossies, blogs, newspapers and newsletters currently offering that advice.

Another thing that needs to be reiterated is the very fact that a winery sent this blogger a bottle to review. It's not the first I've received for this purpose by any means. And I know for a fact that other wine bloggers are receiving samples on a regular basis. What this means is that the blogging community is attracting an audience that wineries and importers believe is significant enough and wine savvy enough to justify the hope that various bloggers will review the wine.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of these samples-receiving bloggers were unknown only two years ago. Now they are playing a role, if a very small one, in various people's marketing strategy. For those bloggers out there reading this, you should know that the attention being paid to you is only going to increase over the next several months and years. To the wineries reading this, I would note that your attention to bloggers is well founded...however, be selective. To non-winery and non-blogging readers, you should note that the it is likely your favorite bloggers are going to have more and more access to information that will make your current confidence in them even more justified.

At WineBlogWatch you can count approximately 300 wine blogs being monitored. There are undoubtedly others out there not yet picked up by Wine Blog Watch. Although I can not estimate the number of pairs of eyeballs that are reading these blogs (someone really should try), I can say it's many many thousands of folks.

The wine media is a curious literary genre. Part science writing, part criticism, part story telling, part consumer watchdog. I wonder almost daily where it is leading, if it is really any different from other types of wine media. Clearly it is different from purely an architectural perspective. The way in which the medium allows us to "publish" instantaneously" is different from traditional wine media. The content too is largely more personality-driven: we tend to know more about the inner workings of bloggers than we do about folks like Robert Parker, Matt Kramer, David Darlington or Dan Berger. This is surely a result of the dif