You have evolved. You no longer depend on professional critics for guidance when it comes to your wine purchasing decisions. But yet you still feel the need to disparage them often suggesting nefarious motives for their methods. And often you disparage those who feel that they serve a valid purpose. If I wasn’t so amused by the whole thing I would probably find it annoying. Perhaps there are nefarious reasons why some feeled compelled to discredit those for whom they maintain they have no use. But then I’m sure some think that they are protecting the gullible from the evil critics. A consumer service of sorts. It’s gotten old and tired. But I’ll keep smiling.
There are lots of critics. Some have similar palates to me, others do not. Be specific.
Instead of criticizing critics, we now criticize our criticizing critics. But I find that topic done to death too. So I guess I’m criticizing a thread criticizing our criticizing critics. How meta.
For some people its annoying when a critic has so much power that they can move an industry stylistically away from you preferences. In that case they still effect your life even if you don’t use them to make purchase decisions.
What I don’t understand is when someone gets Bill Klapp like in their intense hatred. Life is too short.
I used to read Parker and others, then I moved on to taking my advice from WB regulars and demonizing the critics. Now I’m trying to move on to demonizing the WB regulars, at which time I will have fully evolved.
From conversations, I get the sense that many critics are “not feeling the love” these days. On the one hand, I applaud the emphasis on developing one’s own palate. I am reminded of my own wine journey and the many wines I had to sell or give away as I realized that my palate differed greatly from some of the leading wine voices at the time.
That said, I think wine writing and reviewing is a critical and needed element of the wine world. I hope that people continue to subscribe and pay for good advice and in depth reporting as this media coverage is essential to a vibrant wine world.
+1
As a wine consumer I like it when “critics” focus more on domain profiles and communicate a producer’s stylistic approach. A score tied to an ephemeral barrel sample has less utility to me unless its a brand new producer and even then a profile article is more helpful.
wow, you start a lot of threads
Personally, I’m appreciative when someone takes the time to create content for us.
Agreed completely with Kevin.
The Internet has made it so much easier to be a student of wine – so much research (good or bad, and it’s up to each of us to figure it out) out there, so easy to find.
But the Internet has also made it so much easier to provide feedback to the critics. Feedback, discussion, criticism, hate speech, adoration, wine-soaked banality, flame wars. To have a presence on the Internet is to expose yourself publicly in a way that is so much more open to feedback than in any past medium. I’m not surprised that the critics aren’t feeling the love. To express an opinion (even a carefully researched, expert one) on the Internet you better have a thick skin. Everyone gets flamed here.
I actually find the criticism of critics a helpful exercise. Who’s competent and who isn’t? Who is a new rising star that I haven’t heard of. The obvious flames are easy to ignore unless you’re in the mood for some light/cruel entertainment.
This could very well be the thread that breaks the camel’s back.
I predict it will go five pages, get quite snarky about half way through, and end with a silent thud. It will probably hit thread drift by the end of the first page as well. (Ken V?).
Oh, and someone will mention Brett Favre -
And not one opinion will change regarding critic’s ripping critics -
Why don’t you tell us what you really think rather than framing your opinions as rhetorical questions and then setting up strawmen? You might elicit an actual response from people sharing why they feel the way they do. As stated, this thread raises the obvious question in response, “what psychological need does repeatedly defending wine reviewers against any and all criticism fill for Michael S. Monie?”
For the record, I appreciate wine journalism and certain wine critics. I find Isaac Asimov and Jon Bonne to be excellent sources of information despite their obvious biases. What I have come to criticize is the personal branding that started with Robert Parker that now seems to have been taken up by Antonio Galloni. My criticism stems from the fact that their business interests appear to have a corrupting effect on their objectivity, and it also motivates them to really promote the marketing and “hype” aspect the wine trade, which I don’t think is good for consumers.
With the relevant word being “appear”.
Some critics my tastes align with, some don’t. However, your post got me thinking. I wonder if it has a little something to do with taking pride in ones ability to do something for themselves and not having to rely on others, in this case, making one owns wine judgement. For example, i take a lot of personal pride in my ability to fix my own car or to be able to build/fix just about anything around my house. I trust my abilities and enjoy being able to do it myself. People take pride in what they do well. Now that doesn’t mean i go around bashing professional mechanics or carpenters, but i do often think i will always do the best job because ultimately i am doing it for my own benefit and that perhaps there is a certain level of mistrust in hiring someone to do it for me. Perhaps there is a level of mistrust with wine critics or we feel we don’t need them so we bash them. Like i said, some i follow, some i don’t but i do not feel the need to bash them. But maybe thats why some do?
Big +1
You get bored quickly having only been here for a week.
With threads like this, who can blame him?
Please. I for one am perfectly capable of getting snarky much less than 2.5 pages in.
And the first 3 pages will be the best…