Mark at Uncorked wrote me (and a bunch of others) today and asked me to comment on the New Zealand wine scandal that is currently unfolding.
For those that aren’t aware, a winemaker in NZ has been accused of sending a different wine to reviewers than what is available to the general public. Basically the charge is that the winemaker made a “review blend” that is separate and superior to the commercial blend that consumers are able to buy.
Mark is concerned that this may lead to consumers distrusting the wine media and he wrote as much at his blog today.
Here was my response:
Mark,
While I agree with you that the old switcharoo could be a problem for larger wineries producing tens of thousands of cases, from a small winery perspective it doesn’t really make much sense. Considering the minute amounts of wine that is produced, often in lots of hundreds of cases, we are pretty much making “review samples” as standard operating procedure (ie everything made is “special”).
Further, as you rightly point out, a responsible critic would be one that actually either a) visits the winery and samples wine that consumers get to purchase or b) buys the wine that they review. Since Parker actually visits the wineries and samples wines on premise most of the time (and often from the barrel) I don’t think he’s at risk.
Now I’m not saying that wineries should be allowed to be dishonest and make special batches specifically for review, but variation and blending tank limitations being what they are, I would be a fool if I didn’t send what I considered to be the best of my commercial blend for review. Unless we want to encourage the industry to move ever closer to the industrial/manufactured paradigm, bottle, barrel and batch variation will continue to be a fact of wine life.
Luckily since we are and will always remain small, I’ll never have to face that particular ethical dilemma.
Warm regards,
Josh
I’d be interested to hear any of your feedback in the comments. Much ado about nothing or is it a shock to the system as Mark seems to think? Let me know.
Winecast - A wine blog and podcast
3 years ago
[...] Update: I noticed that Wither Hills winemaker Brent Marris has posted an open letter on the situation with his side of the story. Kudos for the transparency, Mr. Marris. Given Josh’s comments yesterday, I’ll accept that this was just a result of differing bottling runs and not an attempt at pulling a fast one on critics. [...]
Alex
3 years ago
I think this situation is more a case of “much ado about nothing,” at least from the perspective of its possible harm to wine media credibility. The merits of wine scores aren’t going to change because of a scandal such as this one since, well, wine publications exist in a capitalist market, not a meritocracy. But I agree with you, Josh, that ultimately wine production is part agricuture and part artisan craftsmanship. Stated differently, if you want the same cheese every time, buy Velveeta. *)
JimKay
3 years ago
I have read similar rumors out of the en primieur tastings at Bordeaux. Wines are tasted about seven months after harvest. They are supposedly representative of wines that won’t be release until two years later. The final blend may not even be assmebled yet. The price of the wine is heavily influenced by the reviews generated from the sample presented at that event. There must be tremendous pressure to make a “reviewers” blend for the event.