Fermentation: The Daily Wine Blog

Making the Best of Appellations

The assumption of the American Viticultural Area (appellation) program is that there is something unique about those areas that are granted AVA status—that there is something about Oakville, Anderson Valley, Finger Lakes and Green Valley that make them distinct.

However, the subtext of this quasi-appellation program administered by the federal government and completely embraced by the American wine industry is that the wines the emerge from specifically designated American Viticultural Areas are themselves unique because they somehow contain identifiable characteristics that can be traced to the uniqueness of the AVAs in which the grapes were grown.

This is the assumption that Appellation America has always embraced and promoted in its fantastic journalistic efforts and its the proposition that it hopes to bring real clarity to with its recently announced "Best of Appellation Evaluation Program".

As described, the Best of Appellation Evaluation Program "obliges the [program's] assessors to systematically evaluate the wines, individually and collectively, for place characteristics."

Appellation America's publisher, Roger Dial, goes on to explain, "In the days, months, and years going forward we will be doing what our readers continually ask us to do. We’re going to look at every appellation in North America, building an on-going, ever-developing picture of the mosaic of regional character and diversity that we hope will enrich our wine culture."

This is a monumental task that strikes me as being the kind of effort that will bring as much criticism as it does praise. However, the praise will be deserved and the criticism will simply be sour grapes.

What happens when the regional characteristics of Oakville Merlot are defined in a way that identifies one famous Oakville producer's Merlot as uncharacteristic of the  appellation? This won't make the Oakville Merlot producer very happy. But I think this unhappiness is a natural result of winemaking philosophies that treasure style over regional characteristics. Now, I don't want to suggest that focusing on producing a specific style of wine rather than achieving regional reflection is a bad thing. It's just a thing. It's just not a very interesting thing.

Others have previously used the evaluation processes to focus on regional characteristics. For example, Dan Berger, who runs the respected Riverside International Wine Competition, recently announced that Anderson Valley's Navarro Vineyards won that competition's Terroir Award trophy, given to the winery that displays the best regional character in its wine. It should be no surprise that Appellation America sponsors this trophy.

Down the road, if Appellation America is successful, I expect we'll be able to go to their website and read something along these lines: "Carneros Syrah is a wine that typically displays X,Y and Z aromas with flavors of A, B, and C. These characteristics are best found in the Syrahs of X Vineyard, Y Cellars and Z Estate."

I, for one, hope they succeed in their quest. I'm not positive it will lead to more interest in wine or greater sales of wine or more exploration of different wines from America's many AVA's. But I am positive that it will make the wine world much more interesting.

Nakedness & Having Your Way With Wine Blogs

The following comment was recently posted on the Fermentation post that announced
the American Wine Blog Winners:

You have a very nice blog. I enjoy the information and access to other blogs. I'm a new blogger... have you seen the naked woman on the newest Imagine Wine label? Check out www.imaginewine.com. It is beautiful. I tasted the wines recently at the Santa Ynez Vintners Festival too and the wine is good and a great value, but has to be bought off the internet.

I get this a lot. Folks posting seemingly flattering comments with a suspicious plug for their own winery or wine product or blog, or even not so suspicious plugs but very blatant plugs. I understand why it's done. Believe me, I do.

But here's a hint for those of you who want exposure on Fermentation:

1. If you maintain a wine blog, just email me with the name and URL of your blog and I'll post it in the blog roll.

2. If you are a winery and think there's a really good reason why I should investigate your wines and story, pitch me a story via email with your idea and tell me the most compelling reason why I should let my readers know about your wines and winery.

3. If you produce a wine-related product or have a wine-related service that you think Fermentation readers will want to know about, tell me in an e-mail what is unique, compelling, significant or relevant about your service or product.

Alternatively, you can let me know that there is some element of female nakedness associated with your blog, winery or wine-related service or product and I'll probably take notice.

Bottom Line: Blogs are like any other form of media. They may be interested in what your story is. Interested enough to write about it, even. BUT...assume you need to make the effort to pitch the story in a creative and compelling way.

Offering up female nakedness might work with me at Fermentation, but it's unlikely that other wine bloggers are as easy as I am. Make the effort. Do the research. Pitch the story directly.

Implications For All Involved

A variety of academic studies seem to have determined quite convincingly that the non-wine expert and even the non-wine interested don't like the same kind of wines that the "experts" and those who have had wine training tend to like.

The corollary to this is that the ratings of wine experts and wine critics seem may have little value for those who are not trained in wine.

The most recent confirmation of this comes from a Working Paper published at the website of the American Association of Wine Economists entitled, "Do More Expensive Wines Taste Better. Evidence from a Large Sample of Blind Tastings."

The basic findings of this working paper are that the average person prefers less expensive wines, while the experienced wine drinker (called an "expert" in the paper) tend to prefer wines that are more expensive. The study included blind tastings by more than 6000 individuals.

At the end of the working paper, the following questions are posed: "is the difference between the ratings of experts and non-experts due to an acquired taste? Or is it due to an  innate ability, which is correlated with self selection into wine training?"

Both excellent questions.

I think the implications of this and similar studies with similar findings is immense, yet I'm not sure I've even come close to wrapping my mind around their meaning. Last week I played with the notion that there can be no such thing as objective quality in wine and that any criteria for quality set down by experts or non experts alike is merely an assertion of preference and not anything that can be called objective, if not mere tradition that is capable of, and has, changed over time.

But there is something else to be considered here. Is it possible that a large percentage of those that eventually find themselves to be either experts on wine of taken by wine in general are also much more likely to be a part of that 25% of the population that are called "supertasters"? This has to be considered. Recently Dan Berger, in an article at Appellation America, took a much closer look at the "genetics" behind wine preference. I sense that what Dan might be on to and what the researchers behind this newest study are confirming, might just need to meet up in the middle.

Something else to consider given these findings is the real world role of the wine critic. Given these studies, is it over the top to suggest that articles in daily newspapers and general readership magazines that review wines would be better off not reviewing wines at all, but rather providing more general interest or business-related wine stories?

Finally, this. Among those of us who are interested in wine, we rarely, very rarely, drink a wine knowing little about its provenance, including the producer, the appellation and the price. And whether we say so or not, I believe we place a strong correlation on price and quality. This leads me to conclude that if we see very similar styles of wines being produced at the higher price categories, we may be in danger of cementing in place that style of wine as the style that is equated with "quality". The implications of this possibility are important to consider.

Color and Aroma

Another new wine magazine has emerged of late and like the last new magazine I alerted you to, this one is also somewhat niche in nature.

Color and Aroma magazine is a very well designed, attractive publication that seeks to serve the CA wine drinker and wine lover. The actual design reminds me of "Simple" magazine, but with more color and more drama. Being focused on the Southern California region it is no surprise that the first issue (it's published 6 times per year) digs into the Paso Robles wine region, spotlights Castoro Cellars, review a Southern California restaurant and a Southern California-based wine group. The advertising too gives away Color and Aroma's regional focus.

I wouldn't want to give anyone the idea that they need to live in Southern California to appreciate Color and Aroma. The writing is excellent. Any wine lover will appreciate the articles. The general articles offer inspiration and information for wine lovers no matter where they reside.

You hate to see a magazine launch without good advertising support. Color and Aroma appears to have this kind of support. My hope is that they can find a core of subscribers and good distribution that will allow them to continue to create a very nice publication by providing a good sized base of readers.

You can learn more about Color and Aroma HERE.

The Best New Wine Writing Talent Is Found On Blogs

Those of us who are regularly looking for evidence that the online world of wine is able to reach into the physical or non digitized world of wine need examples to that effect. We have a new one.

Gary Vaynerchuk of Wine Library TV has been published...ON PAPER.

The publisher is Rodale and the book, "Gary Vaynerchuk's 101 Wines: Guaranteed to Inspire, Delight, and Bring Thunder to Your World", I schedule for release on May 13. This is good news for the online wine publishers such as bloggers because it helps legitimize this medium and it gives other publishers a little more confidence in looking into our world for other voice that might deserve a wider audience.

Gary is not the first blogger to see his work published. Tyler Colman (AKA Dr. Vino) will see published later this year, "Wine Politics: How Governments, Environmentalists, Mobsters, and Critics Influence the Wines We Drink" and "A Year of Wine: Perfect Pairings, Great Buys and What to Sip for Each Season."

I can't stress how important this kind of move from the blogging world to the world of print is for the rest of us who blog and who believe that being settled in the blogosphere means living with the appearance that our work is less credible. Despite the explosion of blogs and their impact on consumers, politics and our information intake, ink on paper still represents something more credible...even more important.

I can almost guarantee that there will be more such moves. But it will come slowly. Nonetheless it will happen that writers once tied to their wine blogs will find themselves published on paper.

The best new talent in the wine writing genre today exists in the blogosphere.

Ignorance & Quality: The Big Wine Question

"In yet another anti-intellectual effort to take fancy-schmancy wine down a peg or two, a new book purports to demonstrate that price bears little relation to quality and that the experts don’t know what they are talking about."

This is how Eric Asimov at The Pour begins a post that I think is deliciously provocative.

The "effort" he is referring to is a new book entitled, "The Wine Trials". The book describes a set of blind tastings of wines costing between $2 and $150 undertaken by 500 experts and non experts alike. The less expensive wines are preferred or, as the author says, "hide the label and the truth comes out."

So what? We've heard this before. A tasting or study reveals that often less expensive wines beat more expensive wines in blind tastings. Asimov answers the question of "So What" this way:

"Since when is popularity an indication of quality?....I’m not arguing for snobbery, but I am arguing for standards....Look, people like what they like...But you cannot rationalize ignorance. It’s perfectly fine to be ignorant about wine. Nobody should feel obliged to know a thing about it...But ignorance is not a virtue, nor is knowledge the equivalent of being a snob. People who know something about wine have made a commitment to it, so their opinions ought to matter more."

I think Eric, as a wine writer and reviewer and wine expert, is reacting to this book and its ideas a little differently than the average person does because in essence this book is taking aim straight at him: the expert. The whole point of the wine trials is to use "experts" as a punching bag in order to make a simple statement: when it comes to wine trust your palate, not the expert.

Just as Eric has not read this book, neither have I cracked it. But even so, I think I can say this: The book  does not suggest that less expensive wines are of higher quality (as I think Eric suggests the book is saying), but rather that less expensive wines tend to be preferred. The reason I assume the book is not making this distinction is because were it to make such a distinction it would destroy the very premise of the book: that as consumers we should rely on our own palates to determine what we prefer. Surely the author would not contradict Eric Asimov's palate were he to taste a $2 wine and a $40 wine and prefer the $40 wine, would they?

But now to the heart of Eric's provocative post that you must read. It begs a very important question:

WHAT STANDARDS SHOULD BE USED AND WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE SET DOWN TO DETERMINE QUALITY?

Is it possible that what wine experts understand as "quality" is really only the possession of the knowledge of what has been preferred by experts in the past and in the present? (there is that word "preferred" again.)

What makes Ridge Montebello Cabernet better than Charles Shaw Cabernet?
What makes Dom Perignon better than Andres Sparkling Wine?

Eric suggests that those that can not recognize that the Monte Bello and the Dom are of higher quality than the 2 Buck Chuck and Andres are ignorant. To be ignorant is to be without knowledge.

What knowledge do those that prefer the less expensive wines not posses that those who prefer the more expensive do posses? It strikes me that not knowing what the experts prefer has nothing to do with any objective standard of quality, but rather with how widely the two groups have read on the subject.

So I have to ask again:

WHAT STANDARDS SHOULD BE USED AND WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE SET DOWN TO DETERMINE QUALITY?

This question can be asked by an individual about their own approach to wine criticism AND it can be asked about the wine criticism generally.  One thing is for sure, if you are going to review wine, you damn well better be able to answer this question for yourself. And if you aspire to expert status, I think you at least are obligated to answer this question in general.

Now, I happen to agree with Eric Asimov. I too believe that "standards" ought to apply to the art of wine evaluation as they should to any critical evaluation of any work of craftsmanship or art if we are going to go about comparing things and if we are going to take those comparisons seriously. I further believe the process of coming to a determination of what those standards are is another word for "education". Coming to the conclusion about standards is exactly what drives those of us who choose to contemplate wine and the culture of wine.

So, let me end with one more question: Did those folks who took part in "The Wine Trials" apply appropriate standards in, seemingly, determining that less expensive wines tasted better?

New Wine Magazine Arrives

I'm constantly watching for the emergence of new wine-related media. In particular I'm partial to publications that don't cater to the average wine drinker, but rather try to fill that smaller niche of sophisticated wine folks. Basically I'm greedy.

Such a publication has emerged and based on the first issue I recommend it highly.

The Sommelier Journal is new and focuses most of its attention of publishing for sommeliers and wine professionals. Yet, any one with a higher level of wine knowledge will appreciate the magazine. The editor of Sommelier Journal is David Vogels, and experienced publisher in other markets but who for years has had a very keen interest in wine. As he describes below in this interview, David came to the conclusion that  restaurant wine professionals in particular were a group that might benefit most from a niche publication aimed at them. The Sommelier Journal was born.

Below is an interview I conducted with David via e-mail.

TOM: Sommelier Journal seems to be aimed directly at wine professionals in restaurants and other members of the wine industry. Given this focus, how is the content of SJ different than what might be found in the Wine Spectator, Wine & Spirits Magazine or another consumer oriented wine publications

DAVID: You're correct that we consider Sommelier Journal's primary audience to be industry professionals. With that in mind, we assume a higher level of wine knowledge among our readers than would be assumed by a consumer magazine. I tell our writers to imagine that they're addressing a sommelier who might be working toward the Advanced level exam of the Court of Master Sommeliers. We try not to be didactic, but we don't want to underestimate the sophistication of our readers. On the other hand, I also hear from wine connoisseurs who are not working in the industry that they have found a good deal of valuable information in our pages.

TOM: In your first Tasting Panel Report on the status of the 1994 California Cabernets, you created a panel of palates made up primarily of Sommeliers and restaurant buyers. Would you expect a panel of this kind of composition to come to different general conclusions about wines than a panel made up of all retail buyers or a panel made up of professional critics? And if so, why?

Since that first panel, I've conducted three more of similar composition in different parts of the country. I do find that these restaurant professionals have a different approach from that of wine critics. Both groups certainly appreciate good wines, but I believe our panelists are more focused on structure and balance than on power and weight. They're always thinking about how the wines will pair with food, and that subject comes up frequently in our discussions.

TOM: Explain the philosophy behind the presentation of your wine evaluations, which use not only the 20 point scale, but also focuses on statistical norms and deviations among the panelist. And while you are at it, what are you thoughts on the 100 point wine rating scale and why not use this much more familiar and influential system to rate wines.

DAVID: The whole subject of wine ratings is going to be addressed in our June issue. I don't want to denigrate the 100-point scale--it definitely has its place, especially among consumers and collectors. But we have found in our research and conversations that sommeliers simply aren't that interested in ratings. They'll take suggestions, but then they want to taste for themselves and trust their own palates. So most of our wine reviews take the form of recommendations from a wide variety of qualified tasters, with detailed notes that will help the reader decide whether to try the wines.

We also want our tasting panels to represent a broad range of experts from all over the United States. I thought about not publishing any scores at all, but we decided we needed some basis of comparison if we were going to discuss a flight of wines from a certain vintage or appellation. So we chose a 20-point scale because it's more precise than four or five stars, but more flexible than the 100-point scale. On a 100-point scale, people are reluctant to award anything less than 75 or 80; I find that with the 20-point scale, panelists will often go below 10 if they are really disappointed in a wine.

Then we had to decide how to present the scores. If we just gave the averages, a producer might say, for instance, "Our wine was rated 18.1 out of 20 by Sommelier Journal," and I didn't want people to be able to separate the score from the discussion. So with the help of a statistician, we came up with this "boxplot," which is a statistical analysis designed to show a consensus of a small group where they may be a wide range of opinion. It's almost intentionally obscure, but it does provide what we call a "Snapshot" of the group's evaluation. If anyone wants a really detailed explanation of how this "box and whiskers" analysis works, there's one on our website with graphic examples.

TOM: What is your overall impression of the state of wine information publishing in America? Do you see robust competition for readers and solid reporting, or are you more sanguine about the state of this industry?

DAVID: The industry as a whole--both wine and restaurants--is growing exponentially, despite the current economy and exchange rates. Obviously, there are quite a few wine publications out there already, covering everything from winemaking to wine collecting. With Sommelier Journal, we believe we have found a niche that was previously almost empty, so we don't feel that we're directly competing with anyone. I think there's a wealth of information on wine available from many sources. There are also many fine wine writers, some of whom appear in our magazine. I don't believe there's as much good editing, and I think that's something we can provide to our audience.

TOM: Tell me about how the idea for the Sommelier Journal arose and what persuaded you to go forward with it.

DAVID: My family company has published a professional journal for more than 40 years. It happens to be for orthodontists, but we do think we've learned something over the years about putting out a monthly magazine for a professional audience. I got into wine as a consumer and collector, then started reading more about it, traveling to wine regions, and trying to learn everything I could. I decided to take classes for a few weeks in the wine program at the Culinary Institute of America at St. Helena, really just to improve my own knowledge, and passed the foundation level of the Certified Wine Professional exam. As a publisher, just talking to my classmates and seeing how many people were serious about wine education, I started to wonder whether these people had their own publication. We started looking around and doing some market research, and we found there really wasn't a magazine that fit the profile we had in mind. Through our research and interviews, we confirmed that restaurant wine professionals saw a need for something like Sommelier Journal. Then it was a matter of putting together the staff, editorial material, and advertisers you need to publish a magazine.

TOM: Do you have an opinion about the world of Wine Blogs?

DAVID: I'm not into blogs as much as my son Phil, who's our business manager. He keeps constant tabs on Fermentation and several others. From what I've seen, though, the blogs are a valuable source of good writing and informed opinion on wine. Some of the best tasters I know are bloggers. The other service that blogs provide is a mechanism for almost instantaneous feedback, with each blog attracting its own little universe of contributors. We're going to try to emulate that networking capability to some extent on our own website, although we don't have any immediate plans to produce blogs.

TOM: It seems that more than any other group in the wine industry, sommeliers would be among the most concerned with the issue of how the proliferation of high alcohol wines might affect the diners experience, if it does at all. What can you tell us about any concern you hear from sommeliers on this issue and how do you view the issue of high alcohol wine and food.

DAVID: As I mentioned earlier, I think our tasting panelists are primarily concerned with how the structure and balance of a wine will affect its performance with certain kinds of cuisine. I hear a lot of discussion about things like acidity, residual sugar, oak, and tannins. If the alcohol level seems to get in the way, sommeliers are sure to mention that. On the other hand, I don't hear widespread condemnation of alcohol levels in general. The pendulum seems to be swinging the other way to some extent, at least in California.


TOM: Among the general wine buying public the job of the Sommelier seems to be least understood and maybe even least appreciated. Do you agree? And, can you comment on the current state of the relationship between the diner and the sommelier?

DAVID: To the sommelier, that relationship is almost a sacred trust. I think more and more diners are becoming aware of that, although obviously there are many who don't know or care what a sommelier is. I find that the younger generation of drinkers, people in their 20s, are becoming increasingly sophisticated about wine, and that includes how to order it in a restaurant. So I think the position of sommelier is actually gaining credibility and exposure. In many restaurants, of course, there may not be a person who holds the title of sommelier, but someone--the owner, the manager, the bar supervisor--has the responsibility to communicate with the guests about wine. We're here to help those people do their jobs better.

You can find PDF downloads of various articles in the first issue of the Sommelier Journal by CLICKING HERE. I recommend you do this if you want something a little beyond the ordinary.

You can subscribe to the Sommelier Journal BY CLICKING HERE. One year of 12 Issues is only $59. 

I'm A Twit!!

Am I a Twit?

God knows I've had this shingle hung around my neck by a few dismissive folks over the years.

But I've never willingly adopted the moniker. Until Now.

TOM'S NEW TWITTER FEED.

Yes, I joined twitter. I'm not quite committed to the TwitterRevolution as I'm not sure how it will increase my productivity as a blogger or quality as a blogger or the readership of my blog. Nor am I sure how it will increase the quality of the work I do for my Wark Communications clients. Both these considerations will determine if I remain a Twit.

It seems to me that one's enthusiastic adoption of Twitter into their daily lives amounts to taking the real plunge into social networking. Blogs are one thing. Scanning social networks (Open Wine Consortium) is another. But relenting to receiving tiny messages at random times from any number of of folks you choose to follow really seems like a leap to me.

I'm trying to figure out what place the following twitter message has in my daily life: "It's colder today. Sun trying to get through."

At this point, I think there might be potential to use Twitter as a way to point Fermentation readers who use twitter toward intriguing news and information that may not warrant a post at Fermentation. In addition, it might be a way to guerrilla-ize my communication work on behalf of Wark Communication clients. For example. I might send out this kind of twitter: "Mayo Winery Launches New Reserve Room Food/Wine Menu: http://www.mayofamilywinery.com/mayofamily/page/reserve_room.jsp (shortening the URL, of course)

If I take this route I'll find out somewhat quickly what type of client info is acceptable to my "followers"—that does sound nice: FOLLOWERS...Like I have some sort of torch-wielding army at my disposal.

In any case, there is an experiment underway here.

I'd love to hear from others who live in and around the on-line wine world just how useful or intrusive they've found Twitter to be.

Wine Bloggers Are Bought and Paid For

In case you didn't know it...

WINE BLOGGERS ARE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR!

WINE BLOGS ARE REGULARLY INFILTRATED BY WINERIES POSTING GREAT REVIEWS OF THEIR OWN WINES ON OTHER PEOPLE'S BLOGS

YOU CAN'T TELL WHAT CONTENT ON A WINE BLOG IS INDEPENDENT AND WHAT IS PAID FOR.

BLOGS HAVE NO QUALITY CONTROL OF THEIR CONTENT

MOST OF WHAT'S IN THE WINE BLOGOSPHERE IS RUBBISH

WINE BLOGGERS DON'T DELIVER FRESH IDEAS

How do I know all this is the case? I read it in an article published in a wine trade magazine.

I consume A LOT of wine media: magazines, newspaper articles, blogs, retailer websites, radio show, television. I have 3 separate services sending wine articles to me via email, and I pay for two of them— thousands of dollars of year in fact. I've been consuming wine media at this rate for more than 15 years. I say this to note that I have some bona fides on the subject of the wine media. I mention this in order to assert that if anyone is qualified to call an article about wine "CRAP", it's me.

Well, THIS IS CRAP!

All the claims made above about wine blogs come from this article in Wine & Spirit, a UK trade magazine (NOT the outstanding American consumer wine magazine that operates in the plural). And with these serious claims not a single shred of evidence is offered. The author is Claire Hu. She should know better.

From the article:

"As well as major retailers and suppliers trying to get in on the act with their own blogs, the bloggers are being offered cash in return for favourable product reviews on their sites. And a US supplier that regularly posts favourable reviews of its own products on bloggers' sites is just the tip of the iceberg. It's becoming increasingly hard to distinguish which content is independent and which is commercially motivated."

Forgive me if I request a peek at the rest that iceberg.

Woops....I spoke too soon, here is Ms. Claire's evidence a couple paragraphs down:

"Others, though, do accept cash from merchants and suppliers in return for reviews. At great personal risk to himself (imagine hundreds of wine nerds descending on your home), Charles Short, of cluelessaboutwine.co.uk, has decided to lift the lid on what he sees as the hijacking of the editorial integrity of wine blogs. "You have a lot of wine companies asking if you can write about products for £15 or £50," he says. "You have to submit your piece for approval before it goes up. Lots of companies are trying to do product placements on blogs. But I don't want to compromise my integrity for a bottle of plonk."

I'm sure we are all very proud of Mr. Short's integrity in this matter. However, I'm still looking to see if we are talking about an iceberg or just an ice cube floating in the ocean. This is as close as Ms. Hu gets to backing up her claim that "Other...do accept cash from merchants and suppliers in return for reviews".

Now get a load of this little piece of disingenuous hackery. In advance of discussing Stormhoek's use of blogs and the Internet to promote their brand, Hu writes the following:

"The more intelligent companies are starting to grasp how to use blogging as a marketing tool themselves, rather than infiltrating other peoples' sites."

She makes it out to seem that blogs are "infiltrated" or used by wineries and retailers on a regular basis. Where's the evidence? I dare say this kind of shoddy writing is what happens when you don't have a press release from an advertiser or or supplier to rely on to help you formulate your thoughts in preparation for penning something that quite kindly might be called journalism.

This piece in Wine & Spirit is presented as "An Investigation" into wine blogging and is offered to the readership of Wine & Spirit that consists primarily of the UK wine trade. Maybe there is some sort of real investigative piece that I missed. Who knows. But, what a tragedy that what is probably this magazine's first significant article on wine blogging is at the same time such a deliberate hatchet job performed by an agenda-wielding "writer" with clearly little or no understanding of her subject matter. What? You ask, "Tom, where's the evidence Ms. Hu has an agenda?" Evidence? I don't need no stinking evidence.

There are a number of really great wine magazines out there that serve consumers and the wine trade. And more arrive ever year. But even so, I'd argue that one of the reasons that wine blog readership is increasing is due in part to articles just like this one. You read something like this and you become disillusioned with the ability of traditional wine magazines to actually cover any subject with any competence. This disappointment doesn't deter you from satisfying your interest in wine. But it does spur you to look for something with more credibility. And while there might be a certain amount of inanity masquerading as content on wine blogs, one thing that wine blogs do offer is honesty. They have to if they want any readership at all because they can't rely on the perceived authority that is granted to writers who's words appears on paper but who, as this article makes clear, have none at all.

(A tip of the hat to Robert at Wine Conversation for alerting me to this story and where he has some comments to make on the topic at hand)

When the Cows Come Home

In today's SF Chronicle Janet Fletcher relates a wonderful tradition that occurs in the German Allgauer Alps. Apparently every fall there is a festival celebrating the cows' return from the mountains where they've spent their time since spring feeding on the mountain grasses. These cows are the source of the milk that is made into the region's Hirtenkase or "Herdsman Cheese".

According to Janet, on September 18 the people of the region line the streets and watch the cows come home. I presume the Cow Parade, otherwise known as Almabtrieb, is followed by a feasting on Cheese and something strong to drink.

I want to go there for that. Just the idea of lining the streets to watch the cows come home, cheese in one hand and perhaps a Riesling or beer in the other is enough to send me off to Expedia to look for tickets.

It sounds campy, and I suspect there is probably an element of camp, but the closest thing we have in this neck of the woods is Sonoma's Vintage Festival. It's nice. There's a parade of local luminaries and such. but there are no cows.

Is Janet's the only regular Cheese column running in an American newspaper? I don't know for sure but I bet it is. And we are all better for it. In fact I envy her. What a great beat!

Winemakers Really Do have Something to Say

I have a confession. I'm not too often convinced that winemakers have very much of interest to say.

This comes from a guy who has worked with a LOT of winemakers, at least in the capacity as their publicist (I've never dragged a hose through a winery that I didn't first trip on in my life. And my singe experience hand punching down Noir in small bins convinced me this was the kind of word I am simply not cut out for.

But to get back to backhanded slap at winemakers, what I really mean to say is that, in my mind, unless you can get a winemaker away from his barrels and tanks that seem always to be calling him, and unless you have a rapport with the winemaker to the point that they trust you, the most you are likely to get out of these folks is something along the lines of things I've written on back labels—nothing of too much interest.

This is what makes Steve Heimoff's most recent book, "New Classic Winemakers of California: Conversations with Steve Heimoff", so impressive. His subjects have quite a bit of interest to say.

Steve is the West Coast Editor of Wine Enthusiast Magazine. So, his familiarity with his subjects and their subject matter is not in dispute. His previous book, "A Wine Journey Along the Russian River" and his independent voice that can be read in his regular wine column as well as in his wine review, both demonstrate his vital and intimate connection to the wine industry. This is quality that doesn't always come through in many wine writers, if only because it doesn't exist. But I'm convinced that this new book is as wonderful as it is precisely because Steve was able to convince his subjects that he cared about the things they were talking about just as much as they did. No small feat, this.

"New Classic Winemakers of California boils down to a series of in depth interviews with a couple dozen of California's most dynamic winemakers. This is candid stuff. It can also be quite intricate in its details with discussions of clones, fermentation, the philosophy driving "cult" wines and "High Octane" wines, to discussions of what terroir is intellectually and what it is practically. Steve demonstrates a real feel for the interview process.

Among those who are interviewed in the book are John Alban, Mark Aubert, Heidi Peterson Barrett, Andy Beckstoffer,  Merry Edwards, Genevieve Janssens, Greg La Follette, Dan Morgan Lee, Rick Longoria, Javier Tapia Meza, Tony Soter, Brian Talley, Michael Terrien, and Margo van Staaveren.    

These and the others, to a person, are the folks who in 40 and 50 years will be referred to by other winemakers and growers as "Mentors". The point is, Heimoff picked the right crew to get intimate with.

Again, I want to suggest that this is pretty dense read. It's not a beginners book. However, it is the kind of book that makes the well seasoned enthusiast much more seasoned for their time spent with the book.

A Spectator's View of 2005 CA Pinot

OK...more than likely we are all buying up 2005 California Pinots because they have largely all hit the market. At least those of us who enjoy experimenting with CA Pinot are looking to this vintage.

Being a guy who appreciates statistics and being further a guy who understands that the Wine Spectator is an important trend setter for quality considerations, I decided to take a look at what the Wine Spectator has had to say about CA Pinots from the 05 vintage.

Here's what we have.

2005 CA Pinots Reviewed by the Wine Spectator
(Appellation, % w/ 90 Points or more, % w/80 pts or less, total wines reviewed)

California Pinots----26% w/90pts----(7% less than 80pts)-----417 wines reviewed
Russian River--------27% w/ 90pts----(6% less than 80pts)------179 wines reviewed
Carneros---------------14% w/ 90pts------(6% less than 80pts)......35 wines reviewed
Sonoma Coast-------30% w/90pts------(3% less than 80pts)------67 wines reviewed
Santa Lucia-----------41% w/90 pts-----(0% less than 80pts)-------34 wines reviewed
Santa Rita-------------30% w/90 pts-----(4% less than 80pts)-------55 wines reviewed
Anderson Vly--------42% w/90 pts-----(4% less than 80pts)-----24 wines reviewed

Interesting isn't it. Look at Santa Lucia and Anderson Valley.

Now, you can take this as an indication of what the folks over at the Wine Spectator like in their Pinot and what they think of the Pinots from these appellations OR you can take it as an indicator of quality from these different regions. This all depends on how well your palate matches up with the palate of the Wine Spectator critics.

That said, I'm pretty darn proud of my favorite little appellation that could: Anderson Valley. I did a similar comparison with the 2004 vintage that's a bit more extensive. You can find it HERE.

Provoking The Future of Wine Journalism

Of late (say the last 3 to 5 years) I noted something of slight detour in wine journalism. Rather than a dedication among wine journalists toward praising and congratulating wines as a rule, there is a slight move toward the secular and cynical when it comes to wine. But it's ever so slight and that's because among those who read most of the wine writings, there is not that much call for peering behind the color and taste of the wine.

Nevertheless, has anyone noticed the willingness among serious wine writers to question and closely consider what goes on in the world of wine and in the glass? We've always had those who place wine in a social and political context...at least one or two of them who write for a small audience. But today it seems more are willing to look at wine this way.

I'm not talking about reporting on scandal and society's underbelly, which often leaves me feeling a tad soiled upon reading this kind of story. I'm thinking about critiques of governing wine styles, open questioning of the critic's role in wine, the various business stories that count up the beans and the close investigations (usually in book form) of the "wine culture".

You don't write stories about  how a product is understood by people, critics and business unless unless that product has come to matter. Where that threshold is for how much a product or industry must matter to the public at large lies, I'm not sure. However, I do know we've crossed it when it comes to wine.

The Internet, with its blogs and chat rooms, will tend to cross that threshold more willingly than the traditional wine media if only because its members have less at stake and more concern to jump up and down shouting, "look at me!". In the last two weeks a variety of wine business stories broke out of the Internet and hit the traditional media. And in the recent past we've seen stories on how the character of wines have changed, why they should change back and what the international and globalist implications of wine might be.

I think the trend among the traditional wine media and the non-wine media is to continue to look for stories that have broader implications than just how a wine might be sumptuous or great to pair with lasagna, though this kind of writing will always rule the day.

I wonder if wineries have noticed this trend? And I wonder if their marketing and PR shops have noticed it too. If they haven't then there is the risk of acting as though no one is watching or as if very little matters to the public and media beyond what their wines taste like. That would be a mistake. But here's where the action and reaction comes in. We most certainly will see wine companies get into some tepid water now and again in the media. That will lead to wine companies being a bit more careful in how they act and speak. This will lead to the media peering in more closely. This will lead to even more searching journalism. This will lead to even more careful explanations by wineries of their company line.

This...in turn...offers opportunities to the winery that wants to gain attention by speaking honestly, forthrightly and provocatively...because it seems to me that wine writers, traditional and not-so-traditional are more frequently looking for "provocative."

Freedom of the [wine] Press?...Mais, Non!

Does this bother you?

A French court has now determined that articles about wine must be considered "advertising" even if the article is not paid for in anyway.

You've not read that incorrectly.

Decanter is reporting that a French court has determined that a magazine article recommending four bottles of inexpensive Champagne was, according to the court, "intended to promote sales of alcoholic beverages in excersising a psychological effect on the reader that incited him or her to buy alcohol."

As a result, the court says, such articles must carry health warnings. WOW!!

Decanter reports the reaction of Dominic Ponsford, editor of UK-based industry journal, the Press Gazette:

"It's absolutely extraordinary. (YA THINK!!!) The central tenet of journalism in a western democracy is that journalists can publish the truth as they see it without the interference of the government or an outside body, within the boundaries of libel and copyright."

Ponsford is correct in every way...and yet, apparently wrong.

When the government gets in the business of proclaiming the right to add its own editorializing to media reports you know you've come a long way from the simple notion of "freedom of the press". The ugly thing is I can imagine the Marin Institute and the Center for Science in the Public Interest reading about this and attempting to make the same case here in America. That might be more of a comment on the radical nature and busibodiness of those organizations than it is about the state of American Journalism. But you can almost see those folks salivating right now.

That said, I'm a huge fan of France. Been there at least a dozen or more times. Married a French woman once. Will be taking my kids to France for the first time next year. But just how crazy have the French become? Such a ruling is so entirely subversive to the notion of press freedoms it's hard to fathom just exactly what was on the minds of the court. I've known for some time that serious anti-alcohol sentiments have been moving through that country, but are they so strong that the French are willing to so thoroughly discard their freedoms?

The Good & The Bad

The issue of direct shipping brings out the best and the worst in folks, no doubt about that. But I also think the Direct Shipping issue is the kind of topic that can demonstrate the power of online media and the power of blogs.

First the good in people. Alder's post on the Wine.com Stings has resulted in a remarkably coherent and well thought out set of comments on the issue. I can tell you that people are reading them too. In the past few days I've been interviewed by upwards of 8 different media outlets on the issue and what it means for retailers in general and to direct shipping in particular. But I want to bring you back to this issue of bringing out the good. Consider the comment on Alder's Vinography by one Emily & Stephan of Winemonger.com. It's at the bottom  of the comments. If you want to see a comment on a blog that not only sets the issue in context, but also delivers an appropriate rebuke, is amazingly articulate and actually takes action by putting their money where their mouth is, theirs is the comment to read.

More than anything you have to congratulate Alder for having what is clearly one of the most involved and well spoken readership anywhere.

But then there is the Bad that this issue of direct shipping brings out. I simply must highlight a comment I received on the post just below this. It is in fact the kind of comment I like to see if only because I know they are reading Fermentation. But it also highlights what this issue of direct shipping can do to people who are personally engaged in the issue. "The Big Boys" had this to say:

The last thing this world needs is a presumptuous prick like you telling everyone else that a system thats worked great for 70 years is corrupt.

You think you've got this figured out don't you. If there weren't any wholesalers you and your faggy California vintners would be up shit creeke.

You think drinkers and your precious SWRA will win against distributors then think again. You don't stand a chance and it's not cause of few mllion doallars. Its because no one wants to buy 100 dollar bottles of wine ovr the Internet. And it's because states don't want kids ordering booze.

Why don't you take your shitty blog, your shitty SWRA and leave the work to the big boys."

The issue of Wine.com and its stings will eventually fade away and we will all be on to another topic and another conversation. But the fact that the issue was unwrapped by bloggers and blog readers and by those that comment on wine bulletin boards will be remembered by Wine.com, "The Big Boys" and all those in the media and the simple wine lovers that found introduction to the issue online.

 

The Paradigm of Wine

I love reading predictions, particularly those that come at the beginning of the year. They usually are very good recaps of those trends that flew just below the radar the year before. Laurie Daniel of the San Jose Mercury news has a nice set of predictions for the wine industry in 2008. They amount to higher prices on imports due to the weak dollar, the "greening" of the wine industry and more transparency in wine packaging and the emergence of wine from obscure places. It's a very read.

But reading it, I began to notice that Laurie did not make note of any significant structural changes to the wine industry. By that I mean changes that change the way we interact with wine, the way we sell wine and the way the wine industry actually functions.

This shouldn't be a surprise since paradigm shifts in any industry or discipline are rare to say the least. Also, they tend to happen slowly, gradually coming into being. But have you ever wondered just what kind paradigm shift could arrive in the world of wine that would result in a structural change?

This is a pretty straightforward industry. Grow a crop, process it, market it, get it to market and sell it. This basic format has been with us for centuries. And it won't ever change. What changes and what brings around apparent paradigm shifts are revolutions, technological or attitudinal, in the way we approach this very straightforward industry.

Are any such changes coming or are we in the midst of any now?

Growing Grapes: To date it appears that photosynthesis still rules the day. I don't see any paradigm shifts in the works. Organic grape growing is not a shift. If anything it is retro in nature.

Making Wine: Again, fermentation is still king here. Technology simply allow us more precise control of the process. The recent emphasis on BIG wines isn't so much a paradigm shift but a reminder that the winemaker has control over the process in a way they did not in the past.

Marketing Wine: Despite the different ways we now have for marketing wine (meaning, how we communicate with those who will buy it) it always comes down to the same thing: "Hey, buy this...It's really great!!".  Explaining why the wine is great is where the creativity comes in. But I suspect the English Port barons who brought the wines into England centuries ago at some point turned to their customers and said the same thing: "Hey, but this. It's really great!!".

Getting Wine To Market: Here's the paradigm shift. The combination of common carriers and Internet sales is changing everything. The laws still need to catch up with the technological capability and the desires of the customers. They'll catch up. There's just too much to be gained by all concerned for them not to. This paradigm shift is a blow to the state mandated three tier system, but it's not a blow to the general system of using wholesalers, who will always be needed to bring wines to market.

I was talking to a colleague about this subject and they suggested that I hadn't given consideration to one possible paradigm changed: The retirement of Robert Parker, Jr. Would the elimination of the Wine Advocate really bring about a radical shift in the wine industry? I don't think less wine would be purchased. Nor do I think marketers and consumers would stop relying so much on reviews and scores...they'd get them from others. What would change, I think, is that certain wineries could not depend on Robert Parker to be their marketing and PR agent. But that's no paradigm change. Wineries go through PR firms and marketing agents pretty quickly the way it is.

Write and Write Well!

If I could choose to get paid to write professionally about any topic I don't it would be wine. It would either be a career writing about playing pitcher for the San Francisco Giants or about spending time on sandy beaches.

The fact is, if I did write professionally about wine, it's likely I wouldn't be able to spend much time even casually researching the intensity of sunshine on sandy beaches. It's just too damn hard to make a good living writing about wine.

That's why the folks who will be presenting, talking and working with attendees at the 3rd Symposium for Professional Wine Writers are so impressive. They actually make a good living writing about wine.

Here's a secret to life. If you want to be good at something, spend time around other people who are good at it. The is the single best reason to try to attend this Symposium happening February 19 to 22 in Napa Valley. Among those who are very good at wine writing and who make a living at it and who will be on hand to work with no more than sixty or so attendees are:

Antonia Allegra, Brett Anderson, Bill Daley, Jack Hart, Bob Hosmon, Bill LeBlond, Karen MacNeil, Linda Murphy, David Rosengarten, Lettie Teague and Alder Yarrow.

The cost to attend is $475. On top of that you'll need a place to stay. Meadowood, a sponsor of the symposium, is offering a rate of $250 per night for attendees. However, there are 15 fellowships available, each sponsored by a Napa Valley winery. The fellowship pays for registration and lodging at Meadowood. Frankly, I don't think you could get as much out of this symposium if you did not stay "on campus", as it were with Meadowood.

I've not been the past two years, but not for thinking the event too trivial. Rather, I've simply not been able to muster the $1600 and the time. However that did not stop me from applying for the Fellowship both years and had I been chosen for one I would have found the time.

Which brings me to my advice: If you are serious about pursuing wine writing, be it in blog or print, you really should go to this event, either by paying or applying for a fellowship. We are not just talking about the high caliber speakers mentioned about. We are talking about four days with others who are very serious about their wine writing careers. Walking away from this kind of intensive immersion into the craft of wine writing without having improved your craft could only mean you are much better suited to be a reader rather than a writer.

Finally, I'd like to note that one of the sessions scheduled this year is entitled, "Media Convergence: Writing for the Internet, Blogs, Pod Casting and Video Casting—Basics, wine searches and Opening Fields for Wine Writers. The session will be headed up by Alder Yarrow of Vinography along with other professionals.

UPDATE:
Derrick at Obsession With Food relates in the comment section that the deadline to apply for the Fellowships is up. What a shame.

 

Wolfgang Spumes!

In the first place I'm willing to check out any wine blog that names itself with a genuine word I've never even heard of. Hence, SPUME is something I wanted to check into. But then I realize that SPUME is a new blog written by Wolfgang Weber, the second but better reason to check out this brand new wine blog.

Wolfgang is is Senior Editor at Wine & Spirits Magazine, a very well respected (particularly by those in the wine business) consumer wine publication you can find on any good magazine rack. Wolfgang brings more than just his editorship to the world of wine blogging. His background includes a stint at the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization in Rome, a time at Red & Green where he help produce outstanding Zins, and time with wine importer Bartholomew Broadbent.

Wolfgang joins the likes of Eric Asimov, Alice Feiring, Ray Isle, Jim Gordon and Mark Fisher—all professional journalists and writers who have turned to blogging to, I suppose, scratch an itch that isn't completely satisfied by their day job. That's good for folks who read wine blogs and folks who want excellent, authoritative wine commentary.

There is a very comfortable, personal, insiders feel to Wolfgang's new blog. It will be interesting to see if he talks much about the process of working in the world of wine journalism. I for one would be interested in reading about the intricacies of that life. The fact is it's a world very few people get a glimpse into and this is why, I presume, we regularly hear criticisms about wine publication not to mention claims of nefarious intentions when it comes to their coverage and review.

Still, back to "Spume". I actually looked up the word in my handy dictionary just to confirm that Wolfgang wasn't trying to put one over on us by defining the word as: "a mass of bubbles formed by a liquid, often through fermentation". Indeed, that is a good definition.

So, I'm looking forward to reading Wolfgang and tracking his "Spume". Now all I need is an opportunity to casually use the word in a conversation.

Most Interesting Wine Stories of 2007

The 2007 calendar year is coming to an end an that prompts me to think harder about the past two months, to make assessments and to try to learn some lessons before we move on the perfectly lovely arbitrary notion of a "new year".

The wine new of 2007 when looked at retrospectively turns out to be truly educational as well as a signal of what to anticipate in the coming year and years. Here are my most interesting news stories of 2007

Ernest Gallo Dies
You don't see a death like this every year. The man was 97 years old, the patriarch of the most important wine organization in the world and had led a company that literally spanned the entirety of the modern history and development of the modern American wine industry. I can get kind of morbid when these types of passings occur and start thinking who among us has the potential to illicit the kind of full on pause when they pass and the kind of jaw dropping awe when we are forced to consider the meaning of their lives to our industry. I can think of only one living person in the American wine industry who possessed similar industry personification potential.

The Case of Wine & Family and Books
The reception that Julia Flynn Siler's "House of Mondavi" received did not totally surprise me. W hat surprised me was that it was published to begin with and received such wide distribution. Though probably  a case of my being blinded by being inside the forest rather than in the clearing, I'm still stunned at how well this book on the travails and successes of the Robert Mondavi Winery did. Most books sell few copies. This book sold MANY copies. It's a testament to Flynn Siler and her publisher. But it should also be message: the goings on in the wine business ARE interesting to those outside it. I see the success of "The House of Mondavi" similar to the success of Sideways: There is ample room to exploit the goings on of the wine business that will be of great interest to the general, beer and coke drinking society.

$162 Billion and Counting
That was the amount that MKF Research determined the American Wine Industry contributes to the economy. This is a big Frigg'n number and was not lost on policy makers in Washington when it was unveiled there in January. It's hard not to take seriously an industry that generates this kind of contribution to the economy. When you combine this revelation with the related revelation that America will soon become the largest wine drinking country in the world and all sorts of ideas start swirling in your head from the change that has overcome our culture to the willingness of non-traditional wine producing states to support their developing industries to the potential to use the American wine market to explore new ways to promote and market wine.

Gary Vaynerchuk
It's very difficult to predict the course any public personality will take in the future, particularly Gary's. But it's important to note things about Gary's success with and and as a result of WineLibraryTV: 1) It has been a very long time since a true "personality" has emerged from the American Wine Industry that has the potential to transcend the cynical gaze of the industry itself and appeal to an audience of "regular people". Gary is doing that. 2) Gary emerged from an online presence. I think he'll eventually shed his association with the world of wine online. But the fact that he burst on to the scene in the form of ones and zeros is significant to a lot of people and should be significant to a lot more people.

"Screw'em"
That was the message that emerged from the Illinois Legislature during the middle of the year as lawmakers their bent to the will of wholesalers and striped Illinois consumers of the right to purchase wine from out-of-state wine merchants. The push to keep wine from being shipped from out-of-state retailers to Illinois consumers was a truly cynical effort on the part of nearly every organization involved. The same effort was made in Oregon, where it failed. And it was the same effort that succeeded earlier in places like California, New York, Michigan and Texas, all states where lawsuits are in place opposing this kind of anti-consumer and unconstitutional lawmaking. The successful effort in Illinois to screw consumers raises a very fundamental question: What will it take to demonstrate conclusively that state-mandated monopolies that deliver unchecked power to wholesalers are not just wrong, but almost always result in immoral results?

No More Wine X
I'm not sure how many people remember the brief impact the story of Wine X Magazine closing d own made. But I do. I think I remember more vividly because I know the publisher pretty well, I understood his vision for the magazine, I recall the rancid reaction from the wine industry when it first emerged with its truncated and off the cuff reviews. Wine X never became a big name publication. It never competed with the Wine Spectator, Robert Parker, etc. But it did change the way many people think AND write about wine. Darryl Robert's short, sometimes hilarious wine reviews that often used pop culture references or compared wines with body parts, music and celebrities is something you see in lots of places now. It doesn't matter if you like this practice. It only matters that you recall what magazine opened the door to allow it to become popular.

Turmoil Caused By Costco
When Costco convinced a Federal Judge in Washington State that it was unconstitutional for a state to allow its own wineries to sell direct to retailers and restaurants but force out-of-state wineries to use wholesalers to get their wines to market all hell broke loose. In 2007 we began to see the results of this. Naturally, America's wholesalers hate this development. It opens doors behind which they know lies the the shredded remains of their faux necessity. Nevertheless, the ruling changed a lot of things for a lot of people. In Virginia, a serious winemaking state, wholesalers convinced legislators to take away their wineries right to sell direct to retailers. In Illinois the legislature curtailed local wineries' ability to use "self distribution" to their hearts content and even stripped the larger wineries of their right to do any self distribution. It's important to note that these negative reactions to the ruling were all taken for the specific reason of protecting wine wholesalers from protection. But it's more important to note that the ruling will and is leading to some of the most interesting innovations that will have a huge impact on the American wine industry.

There were other important stories in 2007. There may be more to come. But these are the ones that really made me stop, sit up and think.

Why Ads On Your Favorite Wine Blogs Are GOOD!!

There has always been a bit of a cringe-factor among wine bloggers when it comes to the issue of running advertisements on their blog. It results, I think, from an intense desire to try to show themselves as being apart from mainstream publications that make their money off ads and who have always been accused of showing favoritism to those who run ads in those magazines.

But, advertisements are GOOD for Wine Bloggers as well as readers of Wine Blogs.

The vast majority of of folks that take ads on their wine blogs, and there are not many, are able to charge anywhere between $20 and $200 per month for a spot. The first thing to recognize is that if you are willing to show favoritism to an advertising client just to get, say, $100 per month for an ad on your blog then you clearly have more pressing problems than the compromised nature of your character.

But here's what's GREAT about Blogs that take ads: They motivate the blogger to create a better product (blog). No one wants to sell and ad to a company then see their readership languish or decrease. And in the world of blogging, readership increases as you increase your postings and as you keep your postings compelling for the audience you write for and for the audience your advertisers hoped to reach.

As you can see, we take ads at FERMENTATION. We sell companies these ads because we can. And the fact that folks do want to advertise on a blog that originally was created just for me to to spout off is a source of pride. But I don't think I'm any different than the vast majority of wine bloggers: I want to make sure that those who have expressed this kind of confidence in me and my blog are rewarded...and I'm not embarrassed by not living up to their expectations. That means I try to continue to make FERMENTATION a blog that more and more of a particular audience will want to read.

This is why ads on Wine Blogs are a good thing. They motivate the blogger to give you a better blog, whether you are an advertiser or a reader.

An Impatient Age

“Wine doesn’t submit very happily to scores, but I realize people making buying decisions are in a hurry … We live in a very impatient age.”

"A Very Impatient Age"!

This is Jancis Robinson, the English wine scribe, explaining the factor that provoked her to use scores on reviews of wine on her subscription website, Jancisrobinson.com. This explanation of her giving in to scores came in an article and interview with her by Appellation America's Alan Goldfarb. The bulk of the article is about the educational value of using sub-appellations on Californian wines ("Atlas Peak" for example, in addition to "Napa Valley")

But it's this notion of a "very impatient age" that interests me.

I dare say that Ms. Robinson has hit on an explanation for the omnipresence of wine scores that strikes me as on the mark. I hadn't thought about it much, but it does seem that it is healthy dose of impatience that leads Americans to embrace a simple number to describe a wine, to use "LOL" instead of "that made me laugh" in their digital correspondence, that leads newspapers and reporters to write shorter and shorter articles on complex subjects, and to fully embrace the concept of "Fast" but usually quite yucky food for their meals.

I don't dismiss the argument that there are now so many wines available that trying to read reviews of them all, particularly the kind of review that does a wine justice, would take too much time than even the most dedicated and literary-minded wine lover has at their disposal. Certainly this has played a role in the takeover of wine scores. There is also the issue of paper. How large would the Wine Spectator or Wine & Spirits or Wine Enthusiast or the Wine Advocate have to be to devote comprehensive reviews to all the wines they list each issue? It would take quite a chunk out of our forest resources. Heck, you might even need a website to accomplish this without destroying the environment...

But still..."A Very Impatient Age"...

I wonder if we can all agree that despite the character of this particular age, the consumption of wine and even the perusal of wine reviews must be described as one of life's pleasures for those who are inclined toward appreciating wine? Yet, we generally find ourselves reading "Fast Food" reviews of wine. This is not to say these short, number-laden, reviews are "yucky". Some very nice turns of phrase and information can be imparted in 50 words. But it's just not very substantial.

Why are we all so impatient that we would devour numbers describing wine, rather than words; that we would devour crispy nuggets rather than appreciate the aroma that wafts out of an oven that slowly roasts a squab? Is time that short? Is there so much to do with work and kids and friends and the house and soccer practice and meetings and blogs that just getting a chance to run down the numbers in the latest magazine or deciding whether its spicy mustard or ranch sauce is enough to satisfy us?

If this is so, and if we are done and the transition to describing wine with numbers is complete, then there is another thing to consider: Will the craft of using more than 50 words to describe the sensory experience of an Anderson Valley Riesling or White Burgundy  go by the wayside? Will this "very impatient age" put the last shovel of soil on the art of careful, inspired, well-written wine reviewing? If we are too impatient to give this kind of wine review out attention, it seems unlikely that writers and wine lovers of talent will engage in the practice. That would sad. Perhaps we've already transitioned from "would be" to "is".

How then to recapture or even re-imagine the craft of wine reviews of a literary and captivating kind; wine reviews that make us think, rather than add and subtract? A start: I propose a book of wine reviews penned by a series of authors the likes of Phillip Roth, Stephen King, Woody Allen, Don Delilo, Joyce Carol Oates, David Foster Wallace, etc, etc, etc. Edited, of course, by Jancis Robinson.

We'd ask them for 2000 words each on a particular wine. We'd ask them to show us how a wine, good or bad, could be described, analyzed and deconstructed with words rather than numbers. Perhaps we need this kind of infusion into the world of wine reviews in order to overcome or at least put a dent in our impatient tendencies.

Wine Blogger Goes Political

It was only a matter of time before someone wrote the book on Wine & Politics; on the political machinations that help determine who will make money on wine by controlling how it is made, how it it sold and how it is consumed. The only question was who would write.

That would be Dr. Vino.

Not scheduled to hit the shelves until spring of next year, "Wine Politics: How Governments, Environmentalists, Mobsters and Critics Influence the Wines We Drink", appears by its title to take a broad view of what constitutes "politics". This is I think the only way to approach this subject.

The book is an extension of Tyler Colman's dissertation on a very similar subject and includes further research and likely some removal of the scholarly elements and language that tend to make up a dissertation.

While I hope Tyler's effort finds a wider audience, I suspect it will be a book that particularly fascinates those in the wine industry, those who regulate it, those who drink the majority of wine, the environmentalists that deal with the consequences of the growth of vineyards and the mobsters that have attempted to control the wine industry for decades.

What's really fascinating about the nexus of politics and wine is how the issues that surround wine can be ap