Tags
Drink Local, VaWine, Virginia Wine, Virginia Wine Blog, WBC10, WBC11, WBC12, Wine Bloggers Conference
.
PART II – View from the Punt – Perspectives on WBC11 from the Other Side of the Bottle
As WBC11 attendees return home, snuggle back in to their routines, and find time at the keyboard, opinion pieces and recap posts are being written. I’ve enjoyed a number of the more creative pieces, and appreciate the various perspectives that people have shared. Not surprisingly, the most negative – called sharing one’s opinion by some – are the most read and talked about posts.
Like many of my blogging peers, I have a number of opinions to share about the format, sessions, and wines poured at WBC11, which I will write about in a subsequent piece once some time passes. Until then, I feel it’s important to continue to provide an outlet for the voices of those who graciously shared their time and the products of their love and labor – the people on the other side of the bottle.
Part I struck a chord with many readers, especially, but not surprisingly with winemakers. I’m moved by some of the emails and thanks received for sharing ‘their‘ perspective. Of the ~40 emails I’ve received since Monday, it’s clear that winemakers want to better understand and interact with ‘us.’ Many of the winemakers that emailed me (including two that poured at WBC10 in Walla Walla) simply don’t know what to think about these bloggers, and others are unsure of how to go about connecting with us.
Perhaps we are so busy tweeting, Facebooking, Google+ing, and blogging about our opinions that we forget to listen to those whose work we are passing judgment on.
We have 2 ears, and just 1 mouth - Use them in that proportion!
Below are a few more thoughts from those who greeted you and I with a warm southern smile last weekend – View from the Punt – PART II – Perspectives on WBC11 from the Other Side of the Bottle
‘The Saturday event at the winery went very well. I had more than one blogger comment on how amazed they were that we worked as a community. Lending a hand to each other and co-hosting events is something that would be unheard of in other areas of the country. Since the event Saturday was inside the bloggers took more notes and were able to taste more wine. We received very positive feedback on our wine and even sold some.’ ~ Lisa Champ, Sales Manager, White Hall Vineyards
‘As a first time sponsor and attendee, I had an excellent experience at WBC11. Most participants seemed enthusiastic and engaging, sharing knowledge freely and equally eager to hear about my work helping run a small winery and to discuss their work blogging. That exchange was key.
Yet (the world being imperfect) that exchange didn’t always happen. A few times, wielding a bottle of company wine, I was greeted with the kind of snark and the skepticism that some might reserve for door-to-door Bible salesman. Considering our winery’s approach, it seemed pretty inappropriate.
A huge factor in our small (3000 cases/yr) winery’s sponsorship was the potential to connect with attendees through both wine and writing. Prior to supporting the winemaker in my general operations and communications role, I was a writer and editor for a dozen years, and have published in both print and online formats. Writing is my passion. In other words, I was not just showing up to push product; I was sincerely interested in the content of the conference. Given that, I was disappointed to be “vibed” on those few occasions, especially by experienced attendees. Felt kinda like high school.
Next time I hope to have more consistent consideration as a participant. Then again, next time I will surely be blogging–because if there is one reality this conference has revealed, it’s that I have far too many opinions to keep to myself. Whatever the case, I thank WBC11 for getting my wheels turning and lighting a fire under my butt to better represent both the winery and my own thoughts.
Pouring for the speed tasting event was actually one of my favorite parts of the conference. Having tasted at the live blogging the day prior, I knew exactly how skeptical the bloggers were–and why. I was clearly up against a tough crowd, but relished the challenge of turning (often understandable) apathy or weariness into a smile.
I do think that segment could benefit from a bit of curating, so that attendees have a sense of focus as they taste. Meanwhile, given the arguably extreme format I felt good about the interactions I had therein… however brief!’ ~ Amy Tsaykel, Tin Barn Vineyards / Talisman Wines
I had the pleasure of meeting Amy during the speed tasting where she poured one of my two favorite wines of the event, the Talisman Pinot Noir (the 2007 Red Dog Vineyard – Pommard Clone, if my notes are accurate). I don’t want to distract from the message of Amy’s comment by getting too far off topic, but I appreciate her raising the point of ‘high schoolness‘ – known affectionately by some as cliqueness. Interestingly, a winemaker friend of mine noted, in a humorous way, the obviousness of a couple of cliques at the conference. I also heard a few comments from fellow attendees about the number of cliques roving from private party to private party.
Any time large groups gather there will always be sub-groups (i.e. – ‘friends’) who congregate and appear to mimic the framework of a clique. Whether these gathering of friends meet the technical definition of a clique, I’m not sure. I will leave this to others to determine.
Although I was aware of several small groups that seemed to go out of their way to be cliquey at WBC09 in Santa Rosa (just my opinion), I didn’t seem to notice the same level of cliqueness this year. This could be due to the fact that there were so many new attendees at WBC11, or perhaps I’m too disconnected and lack the social senses to notice or identify cliques. Or maybe I’m like the fish that doesn’t realize he’s in water?
I would be interested to know other attendees thoughts on this topic.
Me (far left) with my Virginia wine friends (or, um, clique?)
‘Overall I thought the Wine Bloggers Conference was a great opportunity and an interesting event. Definitely a very different event. The good was getting to meet so many people who are obviously very passionate about wine. The Bad was I didn’t care too much for the fast paced nature of the speed-tasting events. If this is done in the future I would suggest that the bloggers not type or play with their gadgets long enough to hear the details about the wine. By that same token wine pourers would have to spit out the major details and not get in to long-winded descriptions of their wine.
One of the main reasons I hosted the post conference gathering was to get some real time with individual bloggers and try to get my message across, and talk about Jefferson wines, where they’re at, the foods they need to be paired with, etc. before there is an opinion written.
It’s my opinion that harsh comments should be left only for chemically flawed wines – i.e. high VA (volatile acidity), high Brett (Brettanomyces), acetobacter and or other types of spoilage. If bloggers don’t know what these terms mean, and how to identify them, then don’t blog about wine until you do.’ ~ Andy Reagan, Winemaker & General Manager, Jefferson Vineyards
This particular topic has been the subject of much debate recently in the Twitterverse and blogosphere. I certainly believe that everyone has the right to tweet or blog whatever he/she thinks about a wine, but I lean towards agreeing with Andy that the harsher comments should be saved for those wines that are truly flawed, and not so much for those that are disagreeable with our palate preferences. Many of us (collectively referring to bloggers) have a lot to learn in the ‘say it with class‘ department.
As of late, I’ve encountered a number of Virginia wines with noticeable flaws and ones that I’m simply not fond of. Rather than attempt to berate these wineries/winemakers in public via Twitter I opted to contact each winemaker via private email to share my thoughts. I even sent one winemaker an email last Saturday during WBC11 to ask what happened to the 2010 vintage of one of their wines. I could have easily tweeted my negative opinion about the wine, but feel that wasn’t the best way to share my opinion in this case. (Ed. note – I believe a fella named Hardy Wallace of Dirty South Wine would refer to me as a ‘catfish‘ for my lack of backbone to publically name and shame the wines I didn’t like. Mr. Wallace and I will have to agree to disagree on this point.)
I’m of the opinion that too much sunshine creates a dessert – the Sahara Desert, used to be the Sahara forest. I certainly share many less-than-positive thoughts and feedback via Twitter, but I save the harshest criticisms for private (and wish more of my peers would consider this approach when dealing with someone’s labor of love).
I’ve added too much of my own personal opinion already to this post, so I’ll spare readers too much more, but I would like to ask for other’s opinion on this subject. Please post your thoughts on this in the comments if you would like.
‘Your interest in our side of things got me thinking back to a class I took in 2009, and some of the points it raised. The class was “Concepts and Issues in Journalism,” and it was focused on the challenges that traditional news organizations/media face with the advent of online blogging. I’ve noticed that some bloggers fall into the trend of writing pieces that are so opinion-based that they increasingly sound like “industry experts,” rather than “fact-checking journalists.” And as you know, the face of journalism is changing; marketing is online; and bloggers are important voices that every business in every industry needs to pay attention to.
I’m sure you’re aware of this year’s whitepaper on consumer trust in wine bloggers, published by Wine. Now, in all fairness, it merely addresses the fact that the average consumer listens to a wine shop merchant more than they listen to bloggers when it comes down to actually purchasing a bottle of wine for dinner. That’s fair; you gain trust in your neighbor, not an online voice you’ve never met. But on the issue of trust, isn’t it the Journalists Creed that gains trust in newspaper readership – the fact checking, the ethics, the oversight, etc.? And if that’s the case, it occurs to me that the blogger more interested in writing “opinion-based journal entries,” as opposed to the pursuit of “reporting,” would then develop less trust amongst his/her audience. I guess at the end of the day, when I’m reading a wine blog, I lose interest when I find that it’s focused on what the blogger liked or didn’t like, instead of reporting on whatever the facts of perception were, and leaving judgments up to their readers. I think if more wine bloggers took a “reporting” approach, there would be more trust amongst blog audiences, and those blogs would be more influential overall. Or maybe it’s just one factor among many. And don’t get me wrong – opinion based blogs have a place, and have a following for a reason. Sometimes you just need to escape into a fun read/review/voice.’ ~ Allan Delmare, Wine Club Manager/Marketing Director, Rappahannock Cellars
‘As a fruit grower and cidermaker, I can say without reservation that it was refreshing to pour for people who are genuinely interested in wine, open to new experiences and enthusiastic about trying new wine (and cider). The audience was knowledgeable, yet open to new knowledge. Everyone visiting the Foggy Ridge Cider table asked questions and showed genuine interest in the apple varieties we use for our cider, as well as our cider blends and styles. And at other points in the conference I heard sharing—sharing ideas, impressions, knowledge, enthusiasms and contacts. There was very little “showing off” and the wine snobbery I see at some events. And there was a much much higher level of knowledge than we sometimes see at festivals.
If I could speak to all the WBC11 attendees, I would say don’t be afraid to ask growers and producers questions about how we make wine or cider, the fruit we chose and why we grow such difficult to grow fruit, technical details and more. Don’t hold back! We love to talk about our passion for growing fruit and making wine and cider. You don’t need an enology degree to ask questions and learn what’s really going on beyond the “elevator speech” for a wine or cider. Just like Jancis Robinson said, dig deeper and find the real story behind the marketing story. That’s why we do what we do ~ Diane Flynt, Cidermaker, Foggy Ridge Cider
Diane’s Foggy Ridge Serious Cider was certainly one of the shining stars of WBC11. Many of the attendees that I informally polled – with a ‘any favorites?‘ or ‘any new finds you would buy to take home?‘ – noted the Foggy Ridge Serious Cider as one of their favorites. I wasn’t surprised to hear this feedback. For readers interested in learning more about Cider, and Virginia hard apple cider, check out this piece by Diane Flynt – Virginia Hard Cider 101.
‘Being a part of WBC11 was a great experience for Chateau Morrisette. As one of the oldest wineries in the state of Virginia we have seen so many changes take place over the years in the way we communicate with our audiences. The powerful impact that the blogging community has throughout the entire United States and here in Virginia is reaching out with varied perspectives, differing voices, and objective views that are incredibly valuable to us all. It was great to meet many of you and see many west coasters embrace Virginia wine and the rich history in our state. We are grateful for the experience and send a hearty southern “THANKS!” ‘ ~ David Morrisette, Chateau Morrisette Winery
‘I think WBC11 went very well for the wineries, due in large part to the efforts of Annette, Amy, and Mary Catherine [from the Virginia Wine Board Marketing Office] and the rest of the Virginia wine team. I feel WBC11 brought a lot of exposure to Virginia wine. I read comments from WBC10 that many Washington wineries did not feel like they got great exposure, so I am sure it is really a matter of getting out of it what you put in and we are really fortunate to have so much support here in VA. I think our favorite part was, of course, the winery visits Saturday morning. While the Live Wine Blogging was fun because you get to meet so many people so quickly, the longer visit at the winery (we had our group for 2 1/2 hours I think) gave Stephen the chance to really geek out about wine with a bunch of people that are just as passionate about wine as he is, so that was great! He does a lot of group tastings of course (we have to take full advantage of the accent ;), but not usually with such a knowledgeable and passionate crowd, so he was loving it. I loved following all the groups comments on twitter too and am glad they seemed to be enjoying their visit as much we enjoyed having them. ~ Kat Schornberg, Keswick Vineyards
‘Overall, I thought WBC11 went well. Prior to my attending on Saturday, I got some feedback from someone who poured their wine on Friday night and his thoughts were that most of the bloggers were not all that interested in listening to the winemaker (also in attendance on Friday) and spent a bit more time socializing with one another. My experience on Saturday though was completely the opposite. I felt that the bloggers were very engaged and asking many questions, though they seemed a bit distracted with tweeting. I think this is to be expected given the nature of the event. I’m not sure what to make of the difference between the two nights except that the round table seating just offers too much opportunity to start side conversations.
And, perhaps by the time we got in to pour our wines, they had already been through the sparkling wines as well as rose’ and feeling a little chatty.
If I were to offer up any critique, it would be this; the event was a bit noisy, which can make it a bit difficult to connect with each individual there. I myself had a difficult time hearing some of the questions that the bloggers were asking of me and I’m afraid they may not have been able to hear me very well. This was likely due to the ‘speed dating’ format of the event and the round table seating. If I were to make any recommendations for the future, I would ask the organizers to consider a more structured tasting that would allow each winery about the same amount of time to address the attendee’s but provide an atmosphere where the bloggers could focus a little more on the wines and the presenters. This might also present an opportunity for the bloggers to sample all of the wineries in attendance rather just a few and allow the wineries to address a larger audience. ~ Tom Kelly, Vineyard Manager, Rappahannock Cellars
‘As a first time attendee, marketing & public relations professional, WBC11 was an invaluable weekend. I learned a lot of information about wine and the industry, I gained insight to vast and varying opinions and approaches, and I left with an overall positive impression of a passionate group of wine-loving individuals who truly love what they do. From my perspective I agree with the statements of both Jancis Robinson and Eric Asimov that “more depth and analysis is desirable and needed in the wine blogosphere.” For example, many bloggers I spoke with either refuse or rarely will do a negative review of a wine. I propose the following thought: As a wine-lover I may find a handful of bloggers that I determine share similar palates to mine. Now I might follow the bloggers not only because I love their insight, writing style, thoughts and tone but also because they become more valuable to me the deeper their insight explores. This exploration would take me down the road of “great” “good” and “okay” wine but also would share with me the “terrible” “not-so-good” “awful” and “abhorrent” juice as well – all of which is still quite subjective to our particular palates. I propose it is okay and actually VERY valuable to your audience to take the time to share with audiences the good, the bad, and the ugly. Who knows? The winemaker of that absolutely disgusting beverage might grow in his/her skill and make your favorite wine one-day and s/he might put your mug on his label (or at least your blog address in 1/2 pt font on the back) ~ Suni Heflin, Marketing Specialist and Social Media Manager, Chateau Morrisette and Foggy Ridge Cider
It’s clear that Virginia winemakers/cidermakers, like their peers from every region, are a proud, passionate and talented group who love connecting with people and sharing their story and passion.
From reading the roughly 50 WBC11 recap posts so far, it seems that the vast majority of attendees had a great time and appreciated the work of the Virginia Wine Board Marketing Office, Zephyr Adventures, Virginia Tourism Corporation, and others that helped make the conference a success. As with any event with over 300 people, there are bound to be a certain percentage that do not enjoy themselves, and will remember WBC11 Virginia solely for the heat and humidity. If nothing else, WBC11 Virginia rattled a few cages and was the catalyst for a lot of discussion.
Thank you to each of the winemakers, vineyard managers, marketing professionals, and winery staff members who took their time to participate in WBC11 and share their thoughts with readers. I appreciate each of you!
__________________________________
Questions, Comments, Complaints, Random Observations? Contact Me Here
__________________________________
Drink What YOU Like 
Frank, I really enjoyed meeting you at WBC.
This was my first WBC experience and I didn’t really know anyone going in, so I find it really interesting that so many are commenting on the cliquishness. I have to say that I found everyone so nice, friendly, and wanting to share their love of wine! So, thanks to everyone I met for being so great – can’t wait to see you all next year in Oregon. And I’m truly looking forward to meeting anyone I didn’t have the privilege of meeting this year.
Hi Marie – thanks for stopping by to comment. This is the first of what I believe will be many comments on this particular post (given the length and number of comments, I gave thought to splitting this one up in to two). It was great meeting you as well. I hope everyone who attended WCBC11 found the Virginia wine industry very welcoming and eager to share their wines and story. Look forward to seeing you at WBC12 for sure. Cheers!
Frank – another great post, and way to go getting feedback from so many participants on the pro side. You’ve come up with a format that is more interesting (for me) than a “how I spent my summer vacation” type of recap.
Ok, so Allan Delmare’s comment: I’m lost. The majority of wine bloggers are not reporters, nor do we have aspirations of becoming serious journalists. How few hands went up when Jancis Robinson asked how many of us make our primary living as wine bloggers? Wine blogging is an amateur and enthusiast’s pursuit by and large. We started our blog to share our love for Virginia wine and talk about what we like and don’t like.
As far as being “opinion based journal entries,” well… yes. I guess you could say the same about reviews in newspapers and magazines, whether the writer is reviewing Pinot, pollo a la brasa, or the Pirates of Penzance.If the issue is that the low barrier to entry and lack of editorial control opens the field to all kinds of palates, knowledge, and writing ability… yep. It sure does. What are you going to do about it? Guess what – I don’t think I would increase my credibility with potential readers if I launched an investigative series into the amount of diesel fuel consumed by vineyard tractors. Where bloggers build credibility is by posting consistently, maintaining a focused blog (you’ll notice I don’t include posts about my love of scrimshaw), and engaging with readers who comment.
That last one is where winemakers have an opportunity. I get the sense from Allan’s comments that he’s not in love with opinion-based wine blogs and would be just as happy if we went away. Just like Bebe’s Kids, “We don’t die, we multiply.” We’ve had winemakers who have really become a huge part of the conversation. That’s promoting their business too. Jordan Harris from Tarara Winery is a regular commenter on our blog. So is Andy Reagan from Jefferson Vineyards. Do you think people come across their comments and think “wow, this winemaker is really knowledgeable, I need to check out his wines”? Because I think that happens. I actually think it happens a good bit.
Giving negative opinions goes a long ways towards credibility, something Allan clearly values. Honestly, I think it gives more weight to our positive reviews. If everything is puppies and rainbows, we’re little more than unpaid shills for the VA wine industry. By calling it as we see it, we’re advocates for our readers – and we’re shining a big honkin’ spotlight on the winemakers who are rocking it out.
And that’s all I have to say about that. Well, for now.
GEG: Thanks for your kind words about this series – I feel these posts have been a success in terms of providing a voice for the winemakers that may not have otherwise been ‘heard.’ I appreciate the thoroughness of your comment and Allan’s response. I’m off to a family breakfast over in Norfolk so not enough time to write a thorough point-by-point response, which is what I would like to do. I certainly see/get (I think) the point Allan is trying to make and I appreciate that viewpoint.
A quick response to one point that you raised – and I’m very glad you raised it because I was toying with the idea of a post solely on this topic: “How few hands went up when Jancis Robinson asked how many of us make our primary living as wine bloggers?” Yeah, that was a profound moment for those paying attention and understanding what that really meant.
I didn’t see but one hand go up from where I was sitting, but I heard someone else say ‘only 3 hands.’ Three seems like a lot to me. I was so disappointed when Jancis didn’t ask the most logical follow up question – “… but, how many of you would like to make your primary living as a wine blogger?” I have no doubt 90% of the room would have shot their arms up like Travolta in Saturday Night Fever.
I’ve had numerous exchanges about monetization with many of our blogging peers, and I find this strange (no better word) and somewhat troubling that so many want to be taken seriously, and want to make a professional income from wine blogging (or use blogging as a starting point), yet approach their blogs and content in such an amateur manner (this only of course applies to those who really do have monetization in mind – which is a lot of our peers I believe). Amateur effort = amateur results. Professional (perhaps in this case journalistic) effort = professional results.
The fact that only a few hands went up is not surprising to me at all – it’s the number of our peers that would like to put their hands up is what’s surprising to me. From my view point, I think this is directly related to the point Allan raised – taking a more serious, journalistic reporting approach is needed (not that we’ll all become official, card-carrying journalists). Just my (quick) opinion – I hope this continues while I’m spending quality time with a few extended family members over a long breakfast that I will no doubt pay for. Cheers!
Frank, GEG: Interesting thoughts on the blogger/writer divide. I think Jancis and Eric were trying to equate bloggers with journalists in a sense, but more importantly urging bloggers to use journalistic principles. Reading through a lot of the posts about the conference, I wish there was less reliance on hearsay (“a buddy heard a winemaker say …”), over-generalizations (“these wines stank”), faux expertise (too many examples), and less incestuous feeding off other blogs. But some of that may be the nature of the medium.
Okay, back to work.
Dave
It’s great to give the view point of the winemakers pouring at the conference but how many of them could say that the wine bloggers conference had an impact on sales? In the last blog you said that there were 15206 tweets about #vawine. Where did you get these numbers? This is a lot of “tweets” as you say but did any of this translate in to sales?
WestCoaster – Good questions. Since I don’t own a winery or have access to winery sales numbers, I am unable to provide you with a definitive answer. I will defer to the winery folks to provide an answer. I will say that I’m not sure that the intent of WBC11 was to ‘sell’ wine at the conference (although I’m sure sales would be welcomed by each winery). To be fair, I do not believe wineries were allowed to ‘sell’ wine/cider at the event on Friday evening at Monticello. During the winery tours, I did see several of the folks on our bus (#4) purchase wine. I personally purchased two bottles at Jefferson at the request of a California blogger who was unable to make it to the post-WBC event at Jefferson. In the end, I’m just not sure any of the “tweets” during the conference directly led to wine sales – very hard to make that connection. I can say that the 15,000 tweets absolutely raised awareness of Virginia wine – no doubt about it. And, that raised awareness is very important to the Virginia wine industry as a whole.
@G.E. Guy: I’m going to address your response point by point.
“Ok, so Allan Delmare’s comment: I’m lost. The majority of wine bloggers are not reporters, nor do we have aspirations of becoming serious journalists. How few hands went up when Jancis Robinson asked how many of us make our primary living as wine bloggers? Wine blogging is an amateur and enthusiast’s pursuit by and large. We started our blog to share our love for Virginia wine and talk about what we like and don’t like.”
[At no point did I insinuate that a blogger *should* be a journalist; rather, I postulated that there might be a correlation between the level of trust in wine blog readership and consumer behavior, and that the level of trust might be influenced by a particular style of blogging. Further, I suggest that many factors relating to readership trust might influence this consumer behavior, and that an investigation into the dynamics of traditional journalism might shed some light on the topic. Again, this is strictly within the context of ascertaining the nature of wine blogging influence on wine buyers. This has NOTHING to do with whether a blogger should or shouldn’t be a journalist, whether there is a right or wrong way to blog, or whether wine bloggers should even care about their influence on consumer behavior in the first place. But since we’ve gone there, I’ll go ahead and address those topics in a minute. But first, I’m in marketing, and when asked for my perspective, this is what I’m curious about. So why do wine bloggers have such limited influence on consumer behavior, and how might (or might not) blogging styles contribute to this? I’m not here to start a war on who’s blogging style is better or more appropriate; rather, I want to know if a particular blogging style might garner more trust in readership, if that impacts consumer behavior, and why.]
“As far as being “opinion based journal entries,” well… yes. I guess you could say the same about reviews in newspapers and magazines, whether the writer is reviewing Pinot, pollo a la brasa, or the Pirates of Penzance. If the issue is that the low barrier to entry and lack of editorial control opens the field to all kinds of palates, knowledge, and writing ability… yep. It sure does. What are you going to do about it? Guess what – I don’t think I would increase my credibility with potential readers if I launched an investigative series into the amount of diesel fuel consumed by vineyard tractors.”
[With regards to the “journalistic approach,” I was speaking towards the principal rather than specific execution. On my reference of a motion away from “opinion based journal entries” towards the direction of “factual reporting” for the purpose of increased audience trust…I merely suggest that it is one thing to tell a reader of the properties of a wine, and how it felt – yet it is completely another to report a judgement as to whether the wine is “good” or not, or whether the author “liked” it. And I’m questioning which instance is more effective for garnering trust and influencing buying habits. I think Andy Reagan speaks a bit to this point in his thoughts on “harsh comments” – keep your negative opinions to yourself unless you’re pointing out a flaw, because your preference, frankly, doesn’t matter to a different palate – but I’m taking the question one step further about whether or not personal opinion has its place in wine blogging to try and get a grasp on how a wine blogger’s “feelings” about impact marketplace perception – for better OR worse. (On a side note, it’s interesting to see how talk of doing away with the entire point system in competitions hints that even what a critic thinks a wine is SUPPOSED to be really shouldn’t influence a judgement of the overall quality based on varietal character and region of production…but that’s a whole separate discussion.) Anyhow, my point is that we all know wine writing isn’t like any other writing on earth. By merit of the anatomical differences of each individual’s palate, the appreciation of wine is as subjectively unique to the beholder as few other consumables in existence. I mean, we can all generally agree on what apple juice should taste like – but can anyone really agree on what a cab is supposed to taste like, particularly when subject to regional differences in growth and production? And as such, writing personal opinions in the manner of “I liked this wine….that wine was too sweet…this wine is too dry for my taste…too bitter…feels young….disorganized fruit…” is …well…so vague, that unless one has a vested interest in the author’s opinions, it’s mostly meaningless to a detached reader (RSS subscriber.) So I suggest that one possible way to circumvent inherent differences in anatomical perception while reviewing a wine is to “report on whatever the facts of perception [are] and leave judgments up to their readers.” To be blatant, I think it’s a little far fetched to assume I’ve laid out a directive to write ‘an investigative series into the amount of diesel fuel consumed by vineyard tractors.’ (although I do believe you have a publishable piece there…not that it would be terribly exciting to write.)… So let me be clear: by suggesting the notion that “opinion based journal entries [are] not being as effective as journalistic reporting” I meant to suggest that comments such as “this wine is too sweet for my liking” are potentially far less successful in garnering consumer trust than a statement such as “with the low alcohol of 11% and residual sugar in the 4% range, it’s not my favorite.” … and the main difference between those two statements? One is providing an opinion based journal entry, while the other is reporting on the facts of perception. Now, which one do you think is more valuable to a reader? Knowing that the blogger liked it (which might be helpful if the reader was his/her mother) – or that the wine was low alcohol, semi-sweet, and not to his/her liking? And back to my original case in point: does one or the other have significant play in developing consumer trust and influencing consumer behavior? I know you’ve already said that this isn’t you’re primary interest as a blogger – and that’s fine. My comments weren’t to convince you to change your style. As my very final words were, blogs such as your have a place – people enjoy reading them, and without an (apparent) objective of monetizing your blog by influencing consumer behavior, your blog is seemingly successful in its own right, your method is seemingly appropriate, and nobody is challenging or threatening that.]
“Where bloggers build credibility is by posting consistently, maintaining a focused blog (you’ll notice I don’t include posts about my love of scrimshaw), and engaging with readers who comment.”
[I disagree. Bloggers gain readership through posting consistently and maintaining focus – it’s not yet clear as to whether they specifically gain trust. I would lean towards the assumption that trust is much more tediously earned. Although popularity/influence/trust are seemingly inseparable. Then again, after seeing the incredibly small percentages of wine consumers that actually read wine bloggers on a daily basis, it might cause one to make the argument that it really is a matter of popularity. But now we have a chicken-or-egg question (does trust > readership = consumer influence, regardless of writing style – or is it the other way around? I’d love to know the answer to that one – which is exactly the point of my discussion. Personally, I am more likely to trust the recommendation of a person who’s face I can see, hand I can shake, and name I know, than a blogger who writes (especially one who “snarks,”) anonymously. But I suppose that’s just human nature. And again, if your objective isn’t to influence consumer behavior, then that shouldn’t matter to you. But let me pose this question: if Virginia wine bloggers (or any wine bloggers in general) aren’t influencing consumer behavior, what real “spotlight” are they shining on their industry in the first place? (credit WestCoaster) At the end of the day, all the tweets in the world don’t mean anything if nobody actually buys the darn stuff.]
“That last one is where winemakers have an opportunity. I get the sense from Allan’s comments that he’s not in love with opinion-based wine blogs and would be just as happy if we went away…”
[You couldn’t be more wrong. I read lots of opinion based blogs – sometimes they’re just downright funny. I specifically said that I personally lose INTEREST in opinion based wine blogs. The jump to “would be just as happy if we went away” is pretty far fetched, and very defensive sounding. In fact, it just doesn’t make sense from a marketing perspective do wish away with opinion based blogs -especially if you’re singing praises about my brand! And even if you’re anonymously “snarking” on my product, heck, I can point to 100 examples in social media where bad press was the best press ever for a brand. So no, that’s entirely incorrect. Opinion based blogs are fine; either people read and don’t care enough to take you seriously, or they do take you seriously; if you’re saying good things, then thanks, I appreciate it. And if you’re saying bad things, it gives me an opportunity to handle it appropriately and (most probably, if I’m doing my job right) come out on top in the eyes of the consumer. Unless of course the reality is that the product is flawed, in which case that’s the producers own fault in the first place, and word was bound to get out anyhow, regardless of the opinion-based blog. But hey, there’s always a shot at putting some creative spin on a sticky situation.]
“Just like Bebe’s Kids, “We don’t die, we multiply.” We’ve had winemakers who have really become a huge part of the conversation. That’s promoting their business too. Jordan Harris from Tarara Winery is a regular commenter on our blog. So is Andy Reagan from Jefferson Vineyards. Do you think people come across their comments and think “wow, this winemaker is really knowledgeable, I need to check out his wines”? Because I think that happens. I actually think it happens a good bit.”
[I think that if you’re trying to argue the principals and inherent values of social media, blogging, engaging online audiences, etc…then you’re singing to the choir (I mean, really – we’re having this conversation for a reason.) I agree 100% with you, and as I say in my above paragraph, I welcome your presence and content creation, as well as all the other opportunities that go along with it.]
“Giving negative opinions goes a long ways towards credibility, something Allan clearly values.”
[I can’t tell if you’re trying to make a real point here or if you’re simply being sarcastic. Could you elaborate?]
“Honestly, I think it gives more weight to our positive reviews. If everything is puppies and rainbows, we’re little more than unpaid shills for the VA wine industry. By calling it as we see it, we’re advocates for our readers – and we’re shining a big honkin’ spotlight on the winemakers who are rocking it out.”
[Puppies and rainbows, unicorns and glitter, sunshine and happiness…or snark, call it as you see it, etc… again, I agree 100%. I say keep rocking out. Engage your audience, and thrive. You wine bloggers are a big help to exposing our industry, and we need you. But again, I’ll pose the question: if statistics show that people don’t (generally) actually take your advice when it comes to buying a bottle of wine at a wine shop (I’d be curious to see wine blogger’s influence on driving tasting room traffic, since the majority of Virginia wine is sold through the tasting room) don’t you think it’s better to have a discussion as to “why” consumers don’t generally trust wine bloggers at the register, rather than defending your position against whatever assault you’ve perceived in my comments about opinion-based blogs? Even the big names have increasingly less influence on what people buy, and I suspect it’s because people are starting to get that the critic or bloggers’ personal opinions just don’t matter that much when the wine hits their own palate. So maybe it’s going to take a different approach to really cater wine writing to the next generation of increasingly self-confident millennial wine drinkers.]
“And that’s all I have to say about that. Well, for now.”
[whew. Ditto.]
Allan: A big thank you for taking time to share your thoughts here – I appreciate the thorough reply.
You make a great point here, “So why do wine bloggers have such limited influence on consumer behavior, and how might (or might not) blogging styles contribute to this?” True indeed – most wine bloggers simply are not able to ‘move the sales needle’ in their current form. Of course, moving the sales needle isn’t the intent/purpose of most blogs. I tend to agree with you, blogging ‘styles’ do contribute to this inability to influence consumer behavior, no doubt. Here in the VA/DC/MD area, there is one notable exception, and that is Dave McIntrye – both his reach as The Washington Post wine writer, and via his blog DMWineLine.wordpress.com.
I’ve had several winemakers tell me that when Dave mentions their wine/winery, there is a quantifiable jump in winery traffic/sales (not sure if this means cases of wine, or just a few bottles). Nonetheless, I feel Dave’s ‘journalistic’ approach coupled with his reputation (built on application of journalistic principles) are the reasons behind his influence on consumer behavior.
I must say that the Virginia Wine Time blog has had an influence on my purchasing behavior. A few years ago, before I became (self-professed) knower-of-all-wine-knowledge and expert, I read Paul & Warren’s blog weekly and used their posts as references of what wineries to visit when planning weekend trips. I’m sure there are others who have used Swirl, Sip, Snark, and Virginia Wine Time, and Cellar Blog, and the other blogs in similar ways… but… in order to truly influence consumer behavior, there will definitely need to be changes. Just MHO.
Allan, thanks for your reply. Thanks also for clarifying your position on bloggers. I took your statements questioning the validity of opinion-based blogs and your statement that they have no credibility to mean you saw them as a negative. Again, thanks for clarifying. No sarcasm, by the way, in my saying that you clearly value credibility.
So taking a step back – why do people read wine blogs? It’s not merely to discover if a wine is properly made and flaw-free. One would hope that the percentage of wines suffering from bad winemaking that make it to consumers is small, and shrinking every day. If a see a bottle for sale, I’m going to assume that the winemaker is at least satisfied that it’s worthy of consumption. So readers want to know – what does someone think of the wine? Allan, if you can point me to some sites that review wine solely on objective criteria and don’t discuss subjective impressions and opinions, I’m always looking to learn. I just don’t know as that they exist. And actually, we had a really lengthy conversation about objective rankings here http://swirlsipsnark.com/?p=6325 I’d love your take on this.
In terms of credibility, if someone does a search on, say, your Noblesse Blanc, and they find our site – dear God, I *hope* they don’t take our word as gospel and decide accordingly (though you might hope they do – it got a quite favorable review from me). We state right on every single page that we’re enthusiasts, not professionals. Where we gain credibility is with our community, which is how it should be. We have a number of regular readers who interact with us, and the important part of this is that they understand our palates and interpret our reviews accordingly. Don’t people do this with every reviewer, in every medium? We’ve talked about wines with profiles that don’t suit *our* palates, and we’ve had readers remark that knowing what they know of us, they want to get their hands on that wine and at least try it!
Which brings us around to the question of wine blogs driving register sales. Honestly? Don’t care, not my job. However, it’s apparent to a lot of people that those of us blogging about Virginia wine are passionate about our wine region. The energy of this tight-knit group of Virginia wine bloggers made a big impression on a lot of other WBC attendees. If someone does a search on Virginia wine and discovers, just below the formal stuff, several highly active blogs with deep content about Virginia wine, that says something about the industry. That says that there is clearly something here worth talking about, because there are a lot of people digging it.
No one should buy a wine solely because we say it’s worth buying (or Frank, or anyone else). What’s great about wine tourism is that they don’t have to. They have the opportunity to go to the tasting room, try it for themselves, and decide to buy that wine, or a different wine, or a case of wine, a cheese plate, and a bedazzled Wine Diva t-shirt. I would argue, however, that wine blogs help people make the decision to take a wine trip and maybe even help them decide where to go. It’s pretty common, especially in spring, for us to get emails from people saying “we’re going to be staying in this area, what are the wineries we absolutely have to visit?”
Since you asked me to elaborate on negative opinions lending credibility, I’ll say this: us loving a place means more because we don’t profess to love every place equally. We’ve had several great conversations with our readers about this including this one here http://swirlsipsnark.com/?p=3222.
The other stuff I’ve said about credibility and community isn’t all conjecture and buzzwords. Social media and blogging are a large part of my day job, and towards that end I follow several social media blogs like Copyblogger, Outspoken Media, and Chris Brogan, and their advice does inform our approach.
Thanks for the detailed response, Allan. As I’m sure you’ll see discussed in many places, the Wine Bloggers Conference has caused many of us to take a step back and consider how we can do what we do better. Feedback like yours is a big help in that regard.
Alan: Very thoughtful messages and the way I read it you and GEG did agree on a lot of what was written both both. I think the one over-arching difference in opinion was based a lot on the concept of fact checking which was aluded too also by Jancis Robinson,
Here is my one and only issue with this approach. For a blogger to “fact check” might in some points give too much integrity to the piece. What I mean by this is that unfortunately the wine industry is way too known for “What happens behind closed doors”. The more I hear winemakers talk the more I often realize some of the “tricky” winemaking that is occuring that is not going to be admitted to. As far as alcohol the laws are simply too relaxed to use labelled alcohol as an parameter for a wine. I have also tasted a lot of wines that I have been told have no sugar and that the sweetness is simply “perceived sweetness”. Sure there are wines that have a sweet nature without RS, but there have been times where it has been a blatent lie and trying to convince me that i am wrong about the sugar. The difference between me and a blogger, is I can come home and actually just check for myself, which yes I am geeky enough to do sometimes.
So I do agree with some investagive approach to what is being written, but I find it difficult to trust in many occasions with all that is now available to the winemaker.
West Coaster: Like any kind of marketing it is up to the winery to use their WBC11 experience to gain sales. If we simply roll over and assume people will come flooding in our door, we are dilusional. However, I now have over 60 extra testimonials that I can use on tasting sheets, e-blasts to our members, discussion on our facebook, etc. i do firmly believe that I can generate far more sales then are necessary for me to break even on our investment. It is all about how you use what was given to you. On top of that, we are more known today then we were two weeks ago. When someone now visits the area from one of the areas of one of your readerships, they might recognize our name and come in. Obviously this piece has a far longer ROI, but it is there, especially if we continue the marketing efforts. It is the power of three. You need to get infront of anyone three times before it will be really remembered, but then you name will be somewhat engrained in their mind for when they do visit. WBC11 was maybe just one of those three contacts for a lot of people.
In short, yes, it will generate sales.
Speaking as a blogger who didn’t get a chance to attend WBC11 (and with admittedly little knowledge of finance) I share the sentiment that the conference will ultimately generate sales for Virginia wineries. Those who attended may vary in terms of their writing styles and readerships, but there’s no denying that collectively they reach a wide audience of wine buyers, which of course includes less fortunate bloggers like yours truly.
Our interest in the region has been piqued. It’s hard to say exactly when, or to what extent WBC11 will impact VA wine sales, but exposure of this magnitude can only be a good thing in the long run.
Now I’m going to get back to hoping WBC13 can be held in Pennsylvania.
Jason: Unfortunately WBC13 is in British Coumbia, so lobby for WBC14. They announced 2 coming years.
While obviously I agree that WBC will help sales, it will not happen merely because of what has been published any time soon. It is up to the winery to capitalize on what is being written.
GEG: Something I should have mentioned in my last post is absolutely, commenting on your blog has increased volume to our tasting room and sales. I don’t do it simply because I like to rant (that is a great side perk though). We have met some great friends through the entire blogosphere that have helped our sales.
So really, thanks to the bloggers that are heping this.
Hi Jordan: I think you comment on blogs solely because you like to rant… 😉 I appreciate all of your comments and how active you are here in the wine blogosphere. Like you, I have met many great friends through blogging, which is one of the reasons I continue.
JASON: It’s important to note that Allan said (during WBC12/13 announcement) that British Columbia was “the most likely location of WBC13.” I don’t believe this is carved in stone, but given how organized BC is, I doubt too many regions will be able to compete with hosting WBC13.
Frank: I thought that was a done deal.
If not, Go Jason, you will save me a fortune if WBC13 is in PA. I would enjoy going back to Canada, but BC is a long way away.
Also Frank, you know I love to rant.
Hey Frank….thanks for the shoutout. Interesting thread going here. It’s time for us to create a mission statement for our blog obviously. As most know we are all about promotion of the Virginia Wine industry. We started out just sharing our trips to wineries in VA. Without quantifiable evidence, we can say that we’ve heard directly from several wine makers that when we write about a specific wine, they do see increases in sales of that wine. It doesn’t happen all the time but we’ve heard directly that it does happen. We like to think that we have similar palates as some of readers and if they find a wine we enjoyed and enjoy it themselves, then that’s a plus. We really have no plans to change what we do dramatically but there is always room for improvement.
Anyway, I’m loving this discussion. 🙂
Throwing out a little rhetorical meat here:
Is the only intention of a sponsoring winery to *sell wine*? It wasn’t ours. Rather, we thought it be a good place to a) network with an audience who’s truly passionate about wine, b) observe trends in the industry, and c) engage with highly opinionated and often well trained folks over the question of what makes great wine. These are conversations that we value.
Did we also wanted to expose our brand and sell our wine? Always! But we know that happens best as part of relationship and community building, which doesn’t happen overnight.
That said, I do think that sales ripple out from these types of events. Trying to quantify it as a bottom line, however, only yields frustration.
Thanks for the excellent forum, Frank.
Amy Tsaykel
Tin Barn Vineyards / Talisman Wines
Hi Amy – Thanks for your input in this post. I believe most wineries approach an event like WBC for the same reasons you outline. Not sure if it would even be possible for a winery to quantify the long-term sales from such exposure. I guess the keys are relationships and positive ‘exposure.’ Thanks again – cheers!
Great post(s), Frank. I really wish I could have been there, but it sounds like some of the issues were the same as the ones at WBC09. I am definitely not a fan of the speed tasting for the reasons many winemakers have stated. I would not have dealt well with the heat, though — looking forward to better weather in Portland!
Hi Elizabeth – we missed you at WBC11. As you’ve read, it was steamy last weekend for sure. I hope Zephyr discontinues the speed tasting sessions next year in Portland, and instead includes another session that would provide a better opportunity for ‘connecting’ with the wineries. We’ll see. I think (unfortunately) enough attendees like the format to keep it around. Oh well… will make the best of it. See you in Portland.
Pingback: Virginia Wine Time » Blog Archive » Gathering at Jefferson Vineyards
Frank, thanks for posting these two views from the other side of the bottle. I had actually been wondering what the winemakers, vineyard managers, marketing directors and others who poured during the conference thought about the bloggers on my side of the bottle, and your posts answered that question in an interesting and sometimes provocative way. I started to write quite a long comment on your posts, but trimmed it back to something more manageable and appropriate (at least in length), and saved the longer post for my own blog (http://ProjectSunlight.net). (Sorry for the shameless plug.)
First, I’m glad you gave credit to the organizations who contributed so much to the success of this Virginia-based conference. There was a lot to like about WBC11, but for me the best thing about the conference was the way it showcased the great things going on in the Virginia wine industry. Everyone involved, from the wineries to the state tourism agencies, and right on up to the governor himself, deserves a huge amount of credit. The highlight for me was the tasting at Monticello. Although I’ve visited Jefferson’s home on the “little mountain” many times, I had never thought I would have the opportunity to sip wine in the shadow of the great man’s home. A truly remarkable experience!
Second, I was sorry to read that some of the winery representatives experienced rude or unprofessional behavior at the hands of bloggers, ranging from snarky or dismissive comments to quick judgments about a wine to the unwarranted sense of confidence that some have about their palates. I think these individuals were in a minority, as you suggested, although some of the posts I’ve read on other blogs left me shaking my head.
What I did find interesting were the comments some made about the appropriateness of harsh comments and even of tasting notes themselves. I tend to take a middle ground. I don’t think any blogger should say nice things about a wine he or she detests, but I’m not wild about the flames either. I personally plan to focus my reviews on wineries and wines that I like, so I don’t expect to be posting much in the way of negative comments. But for those who truly trust their palates, I see no reason not to critique the wines their readers might consider buying in an honest and respectful way.
And finally, I enjoyed the comments about what some dubbed the “speed-dating” sessions. Personally, I liked these live-blogging events quite a bit. There were problems, to be sure: sometimes the clock ran out before we had finished asking questions, and sometimes it was hard to hear the winery rep. And I have to agree with everyone who criticized the “live blogging” aspect of it. Trying to post intelligent comments while listening to a spiel or asking questions is almost impossible. And more important, comments posted in the haste of moment are inevitably superficial.
Okay, I posted two – partly because I wanted to see my name on the screen, partly because I thought I should. One was about Veritas Vineyards, one of my favorite Virginia wineries. The auto-fill feature of my phone mangled the winery’s name, and since I was rushing, I didn’t notice until it was too late. The other was about a Texas winery. I had never had a wine from Texas, but I thought it was pretty good, and I just wanted to say something about it. But again, it’s all pretty superficial stuff, and I think we would all do our reputation a favor by waiting a day or two and writing something more thoughtful.
But the pluses more than made up for the shortcomings. In the space of an hour, we got to hear knowledgeable people from a dozen or so wineries talk about one of their wines. We had a chance to taste, to ask questions, to listen to comments from fellow-bloggers, and to engage in a bit of dialogue. I love stopping into wineries to taste, but I find that I often end up talking to someone who speaks from a script, and then answers questions by looking at a sheet of paper that I could just as easily read myself. Here we had some incredibly knowledgeable people leading the tastings: vineyard managers, winemakers, vineyard owners and marketing reps who actually could answer questions about the Brix of the grapes at harvest or the impact of the weather on a particular vintage. What in the world is there not to like about this? I was grateful for the experience, and just wish it could have gone on longer.
All in all, it was a great conference, and I’m especially glad you gave the participants an opportunity to blog about the bloggers.
Pingback: Whine Blogging from #WBC11 | Dave McIntyre's WineLine
We never connected at WBC11, but I had a great time in Virginia.
I’ve poured wine at many wine events and worked in a Washington State winery tasting room for two years – meeting, greeting and pouring. I love connecting to the customer.
So yes, I’m sympathetic to the wineries pouring their wines at these type of events. It can be crazy, but what an opportunity to share and sell. At the same time, some wineries don’t know how to connect with the customer (or with me). The Virginia wines I reviewed and mentioned on my blog, were not only listed because I liked the wines, but also because I felt I connected to the person pouring for me. If I feel “brushed off/ignored” then I don’t review the wine. That’s me.
I’m also one of those guys who don’t do negative wine reviews. Life’s too short to be snarky. Wine is alive and changing in the bottle. One month or a year, can transform a wine from uninteresting to phenomenal. I want to share with people the good, ready to drink now wines. One of the things I learned in Virginia, is that my palate does not always match others – so how can I say a wine is bad?
Love your aggregation of VA wine posts and WBC11 stats. Great info.
All the best, William
William – Thanks for stopping by to comment. Sorry we didn’t connect at WBC11, but definitely WBC12. Enjoyed your recap post. Anyone that has poured wine for a crowd certainly has a different perspective of wine commentary. I’ve poured Virginia wine at a number of ‘Intro to VA Wine’ tastings and have gained a much deeper appreciation for the view from behind the punt as a result. Although I enjoy good snark, I can see your point that ‘life’s too short to be snarky.’ See you in Portland – Cheers!
Pingback: Weekly Virginia Wine News Roundup: 8-6-11 (Shark Week!) | Virginia Wine Trips
Hey Frank,
True story – was google-searching something else for the upcoming Wine Tourism Conference and your blog came up #1 on the search, so I started stalking it…
Thank you for providing the voices of those on the other side of the bottle, because I can speak from the experience of working personally with each of the wineries that attended the conference, and this was no easy feat to accomplish. I have felt defensive in reading some of the negative blogs that happened because of all the hard work I know so many put into the conference (not even including myself!), and I appreciate the tactful and respectful way that you have written to represent not only your thoughts, but those of others as well.
High fives, man. Hope to see you in Portland!
Hello Elle – Thanks for stopping by to comment. Cool to hear this post is ranked in Google. I’m grateful for the response of this post (and Part I) – the voices of those behind this event need to be heard, including yours and Allan’s. I too took a defensive posture as I saw the work that went in to making WBC11 a success. You will definitely see me in Portland – looking forward to WBC12. Cheers!
I’ll tell you, what I’m most passionate about is creating communities amongst people who have similar interests and loves. And that’s what I see happen amongst all of these blogger conferences, within the variety of topics that they have spread to include. And it is no small feat, considering the obvious wide variety of opinions that are so clearly inevitable. I suppose even negative banter is interaction, and it just gives opportunity for each of us to watch how each other acts and then make an educated decision of how we want to represent ourselves in the future.
I find myself so tempted to say “Are you kidding me, folks?!” in my exasperation of all the time and effort everyone put in behind the scenes – but I hesitate because I don’t want to deal with retorts of “Oh gee, wow, you spent so much time putting together something that was so crappy.” I know we will all continue to work our tails off to respond to the feedback we received from this last conference in order to evolve next year’s conference to the ever-changing and in-depth tastes of the bloggers (who have such delicate palates, afterall (: ) and I can only hope it satiates the attendees.
In the meantime, I’ll just be periodically blowing unseen raspberries to Twitter feeds and remember not to take it personally. Opinions are opinions, I just prefer to not present mine as daggers.