The Wine Spectator Award Kerfuffle
Really? This is what we get worked up about, puffing up in self-righteous indignation? Is this the best we can do?
So the Wine Spectator got fooled. It’s kinda funny, and it may even be just a little bit telling. What it isn’t is evidence of any kind of graft or misrepresentation on their part. They’ve been open about their awards process from the beginning.
Interestingly, I don’t fault Robin Goldstein either. He’s got a book to sell after all. This was a well calculated move to garner attention for himself, and he went to seemingly great lengths to ensure that he was able to pull off his ruse. Kudos. Great marketing.
You know, just like Wine Spectator’s awards program. Great marketing. Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot.
What I’m dismayed with is how some rabid frothers on either side seem incapable of seeing both sides for what they are: people and entities working to market their wares and sell their products.
I’m all for a good holy war, but first you gotta find me something holy. This is just business.
6 Comments → “The Wine Spectator Award Kerfuffle”
You said it right, it’s all about Marketing! Robin Goldstein pulled it off and good for him! Before this I had never heard of him and I bet many more folks were with me.
You can look at my comment on the vinography site, or I’ll save you the trouble here….
An “Award of Excellence” means little or nothing.. a mention in the magazine, at best. These restaurants submit a wine list by mail and are judged SOLELY on that… What are there like 2000 restaurants with this award now? When I ran the program, there were almost 1600!
Second of all, I find it disturbing that Jim Gordon is taking a stab at his ex-employer(he was editor of the ‘tator for years)…
Basically, I don’t find it a problem that someone invented a restaurant and a wine list and got an award. It’s all for the sake of selling copies…
I’m afraid that I can’t see Wine Spectator’s side at all. The pay-for-play awards may be well known or suspected by the wine/liquor/restaurant industries, but the restaurant-visiting public is not that enlightened. By cashing applicants’ checks and playing loosy-goosy with their own stated procedures, WS has betrayed its readers.
The publication wants to be respected as authoritative and trustworthy, but by relying on a record message, a claim that Osteria L’Intrepido is closed at the moment and/or a site on the web, it betrayed its readers. Executive editor Tom Matthews’ unapologetic explanation demonstrates how unjournalistic the publication really is. If a trade association chooses to honor a member to satisfy some agenda, that’s one thing. For a publication to do so is reprehensible — and accusing Robin Goldstein of malicious duplicity†and calling him an “unscrupulous person” compounds the journalistic felony.
Claire @ http://culinary-colorado.blogspot.com
Hi Claire,
Thanks for the comment!
I don’t necessarily disagree with you about the public’s perception, but I think it is important to examine both parties motives.
Goldstein may be a professor, but this wasn’t scholarly work he was doing, it was promotion. If you lose sight of that, you lose sight of the big picture.
And the big picture is that in the market for attention Goldstein is winning.
Also: isn’t “betrayed” a rather strong word. The details of the award and the process are freely available. They traded on their name and reputation, sure. But what commercial entity in the world doesn’t?
As long as folks are transparent, I don’t feel that many supposed “conflicts of interest” in the wine industry are truly compromising. Same goes for the Wine Spectator.
Thanks again for the conversation!
hi Josh – haven’t seen anyone put it better than you. I wish I had thought of it! (FWIW, before I was in the wine biz I was aware of how the WS award was judged – mostly from paying attention and talking to somms. But I did find the WS award list useful when I was looking for a halfway decent wine list while traveling on business.)
it seems redundant to say what others have said, but I also wanted you to know how much I appreciated your post.
As a UK wine enthusiast, the WS ratings have absolutely no value or interest, so I remained unmoved by the whole event except for a chuckle or two. What annoys me, and it happens EVERYWHERE not just in wine journalism, is the nastiness, back-stabbing, frothing-at-the-mouth commentary (and it isn’t just @Sonadora having been bitten by a dog) when such stories come along.
A balanced review like this does help to put things in perspective, and one I happen to agree with .
thanks again for another in a long line of very interesting posts