“never accept freebies, then he deserves this egg on his face.” Why just egg and not something more real, like Dollars. Why shouldn’t Parker, for example, have to give his subscribers a free issue? Why is there no real penalty? Or, why aren’t these two guys fired? (There are other publications who would fire such employees.)

What? You’re saying Wine isn’t serious and so there should be no serious penalties? Com’on Steve, you take it super seriously – esp. being a responsible wine writer. And, we are talking about the most influential wine publication in the world. How can you dismiss this so off-handedly?

Thanks for your kind words about my efforts. I guess you and I must more or less of the same vintage. I like to think that folks like us who have been around a long time and still care, still have the passion for what we do are like very fine wine. We are mature but going strong.

That said, if my passion for reasonable behavior on the part of reviewers has suggested that folks like Steve Heimoff or Jim Laube are somehow less than ethical, I want to correct that impression now.

I am not even sure that Jay Miller was less than ethical in his behavior. What I hope I have been saying is that bad behavior raises suspicion and ultimately gets outed. I don’t care if Miller goes to Chile or Argentina or the moon on a paid visit. I do care about the way he tastes wine because some of it strikes me as unprofessional. I do care that he spends a week on a fancy holiday paid for by one of his best friends and then reviews that guy’s wine with scores that average 92 points. I care because those practices raise ethical questions that I answer in the negative. Others disagree and that is also OK.

He can go where he wants, he can learn whatever it is he needs to learn and he should. I do. Steve does. Most writers in most fields do. It is not the trip or the advertising per se that is the issue. It is the relationship between advertising or gifts and opinion that concerns me.

I read Car and Driver and do not worry about who advertises there. I used to read PC Magazine regularly when I was trying to figure out how an old dog like me could learn new tricks in the information era, and I did not worry about who advertises there.

My rant about paid bloggers operates at a different level than my concerns or lack thereof about Steve Heimoffs’ reviews or Jim Laube’s reviews. Frankly, I have more respect for their tasting methodology than I do for Jay Miller’s past and possibly future practices if he is going to continue to taste 600 wines in three days with the labels showing and winemakers pouring the wines for him.

Joe Dressner, who I have come to enjoy for his unique take on things, may think blind tasting is useless. I have a different opinion.

Some may think that paid bloggers–not support on fam trips, but directly paid to post an opinion–are OK. I do not, and I apologize if I gave the impression that there was no way to separate advertising dollars from opinion making. Not everyone agrees with my form of independence, or agrees with the opinions that Connoisseurs’ Guide reaches, but I believe in the process we established 35 years ago of letting the wine speak. I still believe that the objective of all people who post about wine, wherever they do it, should be the same. Let the wine speak, not the label, not the winery and not the money.

Respectfully submitted,
Charlie Olken

I have been a subscriber of your publication for more year than I can remember. I have been a media executive for thirty years, about 5 more than I have been drinking, buying, and learning about fine wine. I used to subscribe only to CCG and WA in my early days as I was forming my personal preferences for the very reasons of independence that you are leaning on here. So thanks for your continued good work.

I do want to weigh in that taking advertising and conducting sponsor oriented business or having financial links to the industry that a media property serves does not absolutely mean that there are always ethics violations where content is being represented one way while its intentions are more dubious. There has been an underlying assumption on this linked to the hopefully dying down Parker brouhaha reverberating through the blogosphere.

I currently publish local home and garden consumer magazines and we would not have been in business very long if we compromised our opinions in favor of advertising companies. I published technology magazines for almost 15 years that were advertising supported and if we violated good technology reporting and favored advertiser technologies we would also have had a short lifespan.

I agree with your disposition and firmly share your thoughts about paid bloggers. Still, it is tough to paint all media that is not 100% reader revenue supported or totally independent of any financial connection to the industry it serves as most probably unethical.

Adam Japko
winezag.wordpress.com

There is a name for that kind of activity. It is called advertising. It is folly to think it will go unnoticed forever and accepted as a new and admired form of writing. Just ask Robert Parker. You cannot have your cake and eat it to. You cannot review wine and have the world that pays you for honest reviews accept dishonest or questionable behavior.

We can debate, as we have here and elsewhere, what levels of transparency and what types of wine tasting methodology are expected of professional wine critics, but most folks expect the opinions offered by those who sell those opinions to their readers to be honest. Claims of “who cares as long as I am honest” only go so far. Ask Robert Parker.

When a blogger takes money for a positive review, that blogger and does not state that he or she was paid, that blogger is masquerading as an independent agent. No matter that he or she tries to claim “amateur” status. You have just taken money for a falsehood. There is also a name for that and it is not advertising.

I can think of no way to wreck the value of the blogosphere more effectively than to pollute it with advertising that passes for critical evaluation and for bloggers to sell their souls for money in the process. Honesty is still the best policy.