Wine Blogging Comes of Age

[JohnL]

Conversely, the reviews I find most useless are the ones that simply tell me what the wine tastes like with nothing else. This tells me more about the taster than the wine. I want them to tell me more.

←

Are you referring to The Wine Advocate? Perhaps The Wine Spectator? Isn't this what they mostly do?

←

I'm really confused here!

First you write of Mr Rogov's examples "...I don't see what's wrong with any of these notes."

Then here you complain about notes that don't tell you anything about the wine.

which is it?

also what exactly is wrong with the notes in the WS or the WA? Or are you saying these publication notes are to your liking?

[JohnL]

Having finally gotten past the application process to be able to add to the discussion, I offer the following.

It is very interesting to see those bemoaning the “dumbing down” and “lowering of the bar” by uninformed amateurs that has occurred since the advent of wine blogging who at the same time demonstrate that they themselves are woefully misinformed about blogs in general and bloggers in particular. Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.

As one example:

but a lot of that is due to his being part of the industry and the fact that he has a more "conventional" website that happens to offer a "blog."

It is not the Wark Communications website (basically an online brochure) that has made Tom Wark one of the most well known names in online wine writing, it is the daily posts on his blog. Through his blog he has gotten paid writing gigs and is now widely quoted in trade magazines (Wine Business Monthly quoted him in two separate articles on various wine related topics in the current issue). Eventually this has to trickle down to his PR business.

This success was not due to simply throwing a conventional site up on the web and waiting. Conventional, static websites are about as compelling as watching the grass grow. It took time, dedication and effort. It took blogging.

He also is not ideological in his approach to major issues and is reasonably thoughtful.

I beg to differ (on the ideology count, he is indeed thoughtful), and so does Joe Dressner who won’t even set foot in a room that Tom Wark is in.

Tom has a definite take on the French wine industry, the three tier system, terroir and spoof. There is an ideology to his posts because he is human and his blog allows this to show through. Sometimes he posts about his personal life. It makes his writing compelling and authentic. I discount people who say they are completely objective. Just give me your unadulterated worldview and let me draw my conclusions from there.

Also, let me give you a bit of perspective from someone in the wine industry. Blogs are more than just a vehicle to share thoughts and opinions; they are also a way to connect with potential customers and to tell a story. Blogs are more personal and focused than a message board, and they still allow for the same level of interaction via comments. Further, blogs have more “Google Juice” than static sites and message boards, which makes being found and read much easier.

One final example and I’ll sign off. Yesterday I posted about a new company called TurnHere that offers filmmaking services to business wanting to market themselves via online video. I was critical of one of their productions, and said it was cheesy and an example of poor storytelling, but that I thought that the overall concept was good. Three hours after my post the Senior VP of Sales contacted me, thanked me for mentioning the company, and said he took my comments as a challenge and that he’d love to help us tell our story.

That, in short, is the power of blogs. Voices are heard, and beneficial conversations are started from both the consumer and the business perspective.

Josh

Edited for spelling

←

Well glad you mastered the application process.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough.

Blogs can be fine.

ideology is good--opinions are good.

Ill formed and supported opinions and poor writing are not good.

there are some good blogs and many more bad ones.

No big deal.

I am wondering what you mean by "throwing up a conventional web site and waiting..."

also--what specifically does a blog accomplish that a "conventional web site does not--providing one can ascertain the difference between a blog and a conventional web site--or some hybrid.

as for the "dumbing down of the discourse" --how many examples do you want?

also--I was basically complimenting Joe Dressner and Tom Wark --mainly for their good writing and thoughtfulness.

I know Mr Dressner and I have read enough of Mr Wark to have a thoughtful well formed opinion of their sites.

Are you alerting us to some petty feud they are having or are you trying to make a point (I missed it).

Yes blogs are more personal (I am not so sure about the focused part) and therein lies a problem with the many bad ones. Everyone has an opinion these days and not everyone's opinion is interesting or adds anything new to the great conversation--that's why every novel is not published (and please --we all know of the handful of successful self published tomes).

A winery website is a good business practice--consumers benefit from information. Consumers do not benefit from opinions that are nothing more than rants or pontification on topics that are well covered in myriad information outlets/media and/or poorly written tasting notes etc etc etc.

And really--the vast majority of blogs are viewed by an infinitesimal audience.

Not so the "more conventional" websites a few people seem to denigrate here.

Again can anyone agree as to what the definition of a blog is?

And shouldn't anyone with an ounce of skepticism wonder about a blog by a winery employee or retail operation? Amazing how people who make money selling wine are so quick to cast aspersion at independent writers, journalists etc.

I also believe that a lot of the industry insider blogs (IMOP some of the best blogs) are read mostly by------people in the industry. I honestly feel the wine industry is horribly out of touch with the marketplace--maybe because they are too busy reading each other's blogs (but I digress--actually I guess I blog!).

Anyway--feel free to blog away!

I am not trying to make a case that blogging is inherently bad or evil (unlike The Advocate and the Spectator folks).

I will recognize the few good blogs and criticize the bad examples!

One benefit of sites like eGullet is one can be alerted to potential excellence without having to wade through the astronomical heaps of wasted bandwidth out there on the "opinion highway."

[JohnL]

Conversely, the reviews I find most useless are the ones that simply tell me what the wine tastes like with nothing else. This tells me more about the taster than the wine. I want them to tell me more.

←

Are you referring to The Wine Advocate? Perhaps The Wine Spectator? Isn't this what they mostly do?

←

I'm really confused here!

First you write of Mr Rogov's examples "...I don't see what's wrong with any of these notes."

Then here you complain about notes that don't tell you anything about the wine.

which is it?

also what exactly is wrong with the notes in the WS or the WA? Or are you saying these publication notes are to your liking?

[JohnL]

Having finally gotten past the application process to be able to add to the discussion, I offer the following.

It is very interesting to see those bemoaning the “dumbing down” and “lowering of the bar” by uninformed amateurs that has occurred since the advent of wine blogging who at the same time demonstrate that they themselves are woefully misinformed about blogs in general and bloggers in particular. Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.

As one example:

but a lot of that is due to his being part of the industry and the fact that he has a more "conventional" website that happens to offer a "blog."

It is not the Wark Communications website (basically an online brochure) that has made Tom Wark one of the most well known names in online wine writing, it is the daily posts on his blog. Through his blog he has gotten paid writing gigs and is now widely quoted in trade magazines (Wine Business Monthly quoted him in two separate articles on various wine related topics in the current issue). Eventually this has to trickle down to his PR business.

This success was not due to simply throwing a conventional site up on the web and waiting. Conventional, static websites are about as compelling as watching the grass grow. It took time, dedication and effort. It took blogging.

He also is not ideological in his approach to major issues and is reasonably thoughtful.

I beg to differ (on the ideology count, he is indeed thoughtful), and so does Joe Dressner who won’t even set foot in a room that Tom Wark is in.

Tom has a definite take on the French wine industry, the three tier system, terroir and spoof. There is an ideology to his posts because he is human and his blog allows this to show through. Sometimes he posts about his personal life. It makes his writing compelling and authentic. I discount people who say they are completely objective. Just give me your unadulterated worldview and let me draw my conclusions from there.

Also, let me give you a bit of perspective from someone in the wine industry. Blogs are more than just a vehicle to share thoughts and opinions; they are also a way to connect with potential customers and to tell a story. Blogs are more personal and focused than a message board, and they still allow for the same level of interaction via comments. Further, blogs have more “Google Juice” than static sites and message boards, which makes being found and read much easier.

One final example and I’ll sign off. Yesterday I posted about a new company called TurnHere that offers filmmaking services to business wanting to market themselves via online video. I was critical of one of their productions, and said it was cheesy and an example of poor storytelling, but that I thought that the overall concept was good. Three hours after my post the Senior VP of Sales contacted me, thanked me for mentioning the company, and said he took my comments as a challenge and that he’d love to help us tell our story.

That, in short, is the power of blogs. Voices are heard, and beneficial conversations are started from both the consumer and the business perspective.

Josh

Edited for spelling

←

"woefully misinformed"?

Please!

I know Dresner and Wark have opinions.

I was commenting on the thoughtfulness of their writing and the fact that for the most part, they do not resort to shallow rants..

I don't understand what your point is about their not being able to be in the same room.

I believe that you are greatly inflating the effect, and impact of blogs and blogging.

Yes a "conventional" website does have some importance--they are sources of information as well as a means to transact business.

How one's opinions expressed in the vast internet are somehow more effective is beyond me.

IMOP--the wine industry is greatly out of touch with the general public. Everyone is talking to each other.

(I'm "in the industry" too)

The self importance is incredible.

The number of non industry people who visit wine blogs (not general websites) is miniscule.

Again, a well written thoughtful blog is good. No problem there.

However, a general forum like eGulletcan at least point one toward blogs that are worthwhile.

Otherwise one could spend thousands of hours tasting the "googlejuice" in search of the handful of worthwhile opinions in the huge mounds of wasted/trite bandwidth out there.

[JohnL]

There are many strong and reiterated arguments here that the vast majority of wine blogging consists of inferior writing.

I believe, however, that the drivel produced by many bloggers has NOTHING to do with the SUCCESS and POWER of the wine blogging phenomenon.

Consider the runaway success of self-publishing firms like iUniverse and many others.  Most of what they publish--complete with ISBN numbers, Amazon blurbs and editorial reviews--is awful.  But they provide an opportunity to succeed for many writers rejected by the mainstream press, and the fact that some SP books have gone on to major publishers and even movie contracts, has propelled the industry into success. 

With the advent of USA Today and NY Times wine blogs, I do not see how anyone can claim that blogging is not seen as an effective way to reach many readers--particularly those with little time to peruse print publications.  Believe it or not, there is a large segment of the population that turns only to the Internet for news, opinion, and enjoyment.  It is easy to search and navigate, generally digested, and one can quickly compare opinions, writing styles, and content over a selection of writers and subjects, without being captive to one publication's editorial slant.

By following links provided by informed and passionate bloggers, I have found a number of blogs that are as interesting and well-written as any professional article.  Indeed, many blogs are written by professionals.  I went looking for excellence and I found it.

←

I don't disagree.

However, there needs to be a critical distinction here.

USA Today and the NY Times are mainstream publications. They have conventional websites. The internet is a medium.

Many people do care what the established writers and editors have to say.

These blogs are merely an extension of these powerful publications presence on the internet.

There are some winery websites that contain blogs--an additional means of engaging the visitors to the websites.

The vast majority of wine blogs are written by people who are regurgitating the conventional wisdom and/or people who believe they have something important to say (don't we all).

The number of people who visit these blogs is miniscule.

True, a precious few will rise to the top.

Finally, there are a handfulof blogs by industry insiders. Some are very interesting offering professional perspectives and information. The number of people who will visit these blogs is tiny--let's not overinflate their importance--IMOP most of the folks who read them are other insiders.

The number of people who are self published and actually make a nickel is miniscule.

Let's at least apply some perspective here.

[Rebel Rose]

Again can anyone agree as to what the definition of a blog is?

.

Wikipedia has a long, thorough definition of blog, along with its historical development and comments on social influence.

I am glad that there has been some lively discussion so far but we are going around in very tiny circles now. After four pages of discussion about blogging in only the most ephemeral sense, it is time to move on. Please offer new and exact references or reviews, or new insights. Posts that merely reiterate what has been said before will be deleted. Thank you.

[Craig Camp]

Conversely, the reviews I find most useless are the ones that simply tell me what the wine tastes like with nothing else. This tells me more about the taster than the wine. I want them to tell me more.

←

Are you referring to The Wine Advocate? Perhaps The Wine Spectator? Isn't this what they mostly do?

←

I'm really confused here!

First you write of Mr Rogov's examples "...I don't see what's wrong with any of these notes."

Then here you complain about notes that don't tell you anything about the wine.

which is it?

also what exactly is wrong with the notes in the WS or the WA? Or are you saying these publication notes are to your liking?

←

You seem to be confused as to the meaning of question marks. In general, these represent questions, not statements.

[Rebel Rose]

Received today from the Wine Spectator . . .

Wine Spectator Editor Blogs

[StevenC]

I spend a fair amount of my day reading through blogs, magazines and books about wine. Some are informative, some are not. Some are entertaining, most are not. Even the best ones seem to fall short, though. I don’t know why. Maybe it’s just that reading about wine can’t compare with the pleasure of actually drinking the stuff. Wine beguiles me, thrills me, makes me drunk to the point where I’m prancing around the apartment and speaking French to the cat. No wine writer has ever done that for me. Not even Hugh Johnson.

Edited May 26, 2006 by StevenC (log)

[MaxH]

... Some are entertaining, most are not.  Even the best ones seem to fall short, though.

For what it's worth, I've noticed more pithy ones in some eras.

--------

"Perhaps Fernand Point did indeed consume a magnum [of Champagne] while shaving and dressing for the day, but few of us could afford such a regimen either economically or physically -- and after all, Point died, undoubtedly a happy man, at a comparatively early age."

-- Robert Finigan, Finigan's Private Guide to Wines, 1982.

[Rebel Rose]

Tom has now taken this discussion to a new level with the launch of the first ever American Wine Blog Awards, sponsored on his wine blog, Fermentation. Congratulations, Tom! It's a huge undertaking. You can view finalists and profiles of the judges on his site.

We also have a separate thread, American Wine Blog Awards, for discussion of the 2007 competition and finalists.

Clearly a lot of people are reading wine blogs, but who are they? And why?