Wine Bloggers Conference
June 10th, 2008
North American Wine Bloggers Conference logo.
OpenWine Consortium is organizing its First Annual Wine Bloggers Conference.
I am a member (and one of the adminstrators of the OWC), so I hope to attend this event. If can’t go, I still support what it strives to accomplish. In my activity on OWC, I have been vocal about advancing the standards of quality and ethics in wine blogging.
A series of Breakout Sessions will cover a lot of ground at the Conference. Tom Wark in his post on his blog has outlined some topics of focus on which he hopes the Conference will gain some ground. Here are my top three issues and my hopes and concerns regarding them:
1. Credibility
In many people’s minds bloggers are the equivalent of a guy on a soap box in a park. (We had a discussion about this on Tom Wark’s blog some time ago). Credibility is the key to the success of wine blogging and it will be established by several things.
First, it will be established through demonstrated expertise in wine knowledge. This will be tough because many bloggers argue that by virtue of blogging about wine for some years, they are de facto experts. I have argued for some sort of central, standardized mark of possessing some core essential or fundamental knowledge about wine. This does not garner much support. Admittedly, WSET and MS and other courses and exams are pricey, but my contention is that the current membership of the OWC has the collective knowledge to put together a good curriculum and testing. If funds are an issue, this body may resort to charging a nominal fee - one that a college student might be able to afford - but not some outlandish one. Then, there is the issue of ego - we all have one and nobody wants to be told they need to prove their chops. My argument is that there is too much at stake to not do this. The cream of the wine blogging world may rise to the top with time, but that relies on popularity and not verifiable expertise.
Secondly, credibility will be established by the ability of bloggers to remove one’s opinions and preferences from offering an analysis on any subject. The exception to this being, that op/ed pieces be clearly designated as such. At times, wine blogging tends to be focused on an almost tabloid-like pursuit of controversy and pitting opinion against opinion. That may be entertaining and good writing in its own right and it is good for traffic and statistics, but this approach won’t find traction with those seeking intelligent and insightful wine commentary and recommendations.
2. Journalistic ethics
This is very much tied into establishing credibility. Blogging is becoming a more prominent medium but one of the obstacles if faces in its quest for credibility is the lack of adherence to journalistic ethics. I’m talking about being fair and presenting both sides of the argument, not skewing but checking facts and crossing all Ts and dotting all Is. In a nutshell: writing like what you say has real consequences. This is an important part of the mindset that will deliver credibility: if you believe and treat what you do as something important and as having real consequences, the final product will merit credibility.
3. How to best communicate reviews of wine
This one will be even tougher than #1 for two reasons: First because standardizing a way of communicating about wine will be met with the argument that it stifles individual style. Some will even contend that this possibly dictates what wines people should like. Nothing could be farther from the truth. A common and agreed-upon parlance for describing intensity of aromas, duration of finish or degree of astringency is just better communication of a wine’s character. It serves the reader and wine buyer.
The second reason this topic may fall short of its goals is that many wine bloggers believe in this vast variability in human sensory physiology. Thus, if we are as different as snowflakes, how can we all perceive the same things in wine? Well, snowflakes, it turns out are not that different from each other and although bottle variation is a very real phenomenon, the wine itself is unchanging in its chemical constitution and is subject to some pretty unbending laws of physics and chemistry. It doesn’t change and to engage in philosophy when dealing with a science-based topic is misguided. We need to approach wine assessment with awareness of the science governing the wine and our physiology. While the latter does have some variability, the last thing we should do in this pursuit is throw up our hands in resignation and proclaim that it’s impossible to find a common and consistent way of talking and writing about wine.
Someone once said that organizing bloggers is like herding cats. Only time will tell. These are intelligent people with a lot of experience and it is my ardent hope that they will see the opportunities which lie in organizing and creating some common standards and guidelines.
Email & Share
June 11th, 2008 at 6:58 am
I do hope that Ethics and Building Credibility are discussed thoroughly at the WBC.
June 11th, 2008 at 9:23 am
I agree. They are vital and fundamental to all other OWC goals
June 11th, 2008 at 11:59 am
I whole heartily agree with topics (2) Journalistic ethics and (3) How to best communicate reviews of wine, but have issues with your proposed solution to (1) Credibility. I fear that the effort to police fellow bloggers would turn into a policy to restrict the wine blogger community. At our WineCompass blog we make no claims of “expertise” and joke about our amateurish writing and wine knowledge. However, we have a large subscriber base who learn about wine grapes, search for upcoming festivals, and read about our winery visits. The same could be said for many of my associates who write about Virginia and Maryland wines. Why should we bother to get “accredited”? I don’t think a one size policy for all wine bloggers would be practical.
June 11th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Todd,
#1 is often seen as an effort to police the bloggosphere but it is not. It is an effort to help bloggers and to improve the collective standard and reputation of wine blogging. Certainly, some may argue that if a lawyer and a journalist can become wine critics, then anyone can. I think we can do better. The blogging generation is inteligent and tech savvy and capable of assimilating wine science - as it applies to wine assessment.
I realize that this concept may be threatening to those who operate enthusiast-based and enthusiast-focused portals. However, the point of this Credibility Building process is not to shut anyone out or to undermine anybody.
The unfortunate truth is (and I am by no means making allusions about your site) that a number of wine sites and wine bloggers present wine information and education that is incorrect. This in turn becomes accepted and assimilated as ‘fact’ by newcomers to wine and that is how myths (or ‘ignorance’) grow.
If blogging is to be the next “it” medium – with clout and influence – then you would want those who give recommendations about wines (from a presumed point of expertise and authority) to know their stuff. That is not an expectation you’d have of a portal intended for no non-experts to exchange tips and experiences.
Many bloggers are seeking to monetize their blogs. I say: if someone wants to make money off recommendations and ‘expertise’ (as presented on their site), then they should demonstrate that they are knowledgeable.
It would certainly have to be voluntary, but it would only indicate that the author of the blog or site has demonstrated some minimum required level of wine knowledge and has been educated about and has demonstrated they understand journalistic ethics. It doesn’t guarantee good judgement and doesn’t guarantee any particular preference or direction.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
[...] wine sooth Searching for truth in wine. « Wine Bloggers Conference [...]
June 30th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
[...] medium, and establishing its credibility. I have written previously about what I think are the top three issues of concern facing wine bloggers and the need for pooling our resources and efforts. Jeff Lefevre, at [...]