Interesting Situation - Your Thoughts?

[Anton_D]

@c fu

Should have named the winery if you’re going to go through this length. I’m sure the domaine will know he’s talking about them.

I agree.

It’s like only talking to Fox and blackballing CNN.

Not a very classy move by the winery.

I’d out them…if you think of him as a journalist.

[John_Morris]

@john stimson

As you know, there has been a rash of wineries uninviting Vinous reviewers, primarily Antonio (Giacosa, Aldo Conterno). Perhaps he just wanted to indicate what the reality is in general for reviewers. I think there is a value for a reviewer to show now and then that they aren’t just there to keep the winemaking estates happy and sell their wines for them. Of course who the reviewers’ primary audience is is another question.

And Parker was not allowed in a number of cellars in Burgundy by the early 90s. The same thing happened to Rovani after that. But I think in those cases it wasn’t just negative comments, it was the feeling that they didn’t understand the wines at all.

[John_Morris]

@Corey N.

@Chris Blum

I get that it’s frustrating. One of my businesses is a yelped restaurant and sometimes you grind your teeth reading “unfair” reviews. Still, I’d say “put on your big boy pants and take the good reviews with the bad”. Or…withdraw from the EP tastings entirely.

Obviously you don’t comp “Yelpers” who eat at your restaurant. But theoretically, if you thought some dude was unfairly knocking you, would you give him free food?

I’m not defending the practice, but I can understand the mindset of the winery.

I don’t see this is akin to comping. The value of a few sips in a big tasting is pretty much zero. It’s more like barring a restaurant critic at the door even when they’re going to pay their own tab because you just don’t want an honest opinion.

If Neal were snarky in is reviews, it would be different. But he’s obviously a very serious, upright guy.

[Brian_Tuite]

I think it is fully within the winemakers right to “refuse service to anyone”. Just because you are a critic it does not give you any right to drink anyone’s wines for free. He obviously irritated the winemaker with something he wrote.

I’ve heard stories of critics who drink two samples of the same base wine with two different barrel treatments and give the wines scores nearly 10pts apart and then question the winemakers assertion that they were the same wines. Would probably piss me off too.

[john_stimson]

Oh, it’s certainly within their rights and totally up to them. I just think it’s misguided in general, although if you realize the reviewer has absolutely no clue (eg Parker and burgundy), I can understand it. Or if the reviewer clearly disobeys a specific request (eg a reviewer giving scores to Cappellano).

[John_Morris]

@Brian Tuite

I think it is fully within the winemakers right to “refuse service to anyone”. Just because you are a critic it does not give you any right to drink anyone’s wines for free. He obviously irritated the winemaker with something he wrote.

It’s one thing if they wouldn’t see him at the chateaux. It seems petty and unbecoming to specifically bar him from tasting a wine at a huge trade tasting. Again, particularly since I don’t think Neal’s comments are ever mean-spirited or anything less than serious.

[Chris_G_l_a_r_n_e_r]

@larry schaffer

I agree in principle - the question that really needs to be answered is why he is not being allowed to taste it in the first place? Was it a poor review? Was it something else? Without that knowledge, it’s easy to ‘jump to conclusions’ but perhaps we should not?

Cheers.

[GregT]

Just because you are a critic it does not give you any right to drink anyone’s wines for free.

The more I think about it, the more I agree with this.

What is the point of EP anyway?

To get buzz for your wine. Nothing else.

If you won’t get positive hype for it, why show it to someone? And by denying him, they got more notice than another score would have brought about.

I’d loudly and publicly deny reviewers all the time if I thought I could get some buzz out of it.

I like Neal but in the end, the winery comes out ahead.

The whole EP thing is a farce anyway, so telling one person in a horde that he’s denied isn’t a big deal. Plus he’s working for Vinous now. They can’t sell his scores as being from Robert Parker, so why waste the wine?

[DanielP]

@GregT

Just because you are a critic it does not give you any right to drink anyone’s wines for free.

The more I think about it, the more I agree with this.

What is the point of EP anyway?

To get buzz for your wine. Nothing else.

If you won’t get positive hype for it, why show it to someone? And by denying him, they got more notice than another score would have brought about.

I’d loudly and publicly deny reviewers all the time if I thought I could get some buzz out of it.

I like Neal but in the end, the winery comes out ahead.

The whole EP thing is a farce anyway, so telling one person in a horde that he’s denied isn’t a big deal. Plus he’s working for Vinous now. They can’t sell his scores as being from Robert Parker, so why waste the wine?

So which winery got the buzz that you speak of?

Regardless, I don’t think the rule of “any publicity is good publicity” applies to wine. This isn’t TMZ. There are so many wines competing for your wallet, why even bother with a wine with negative buzz, all else being equal?

I will also agree with John. I think it’s poor form to deny a taster who’s presumably been invited to a larger negociant tasting that’s being hosted by a 3rd party. They are not the hosts of the event.

[David_Bu3ker]

@john stimson

As you know, there has been a rash of wineries uninviting Vinous reviewers, primarily Antonio (Giacosa, Aldo Conterno). Perhaps he just wanted to indicate what the reality is in general for reviewers. I think there is a value for a reviewer to show now and then that they aren’t just there to keep the winemaking estates happy and sell their wines for them. Of course who the reviewers’ primary audience is is another question.

A rash of wineries? Got any other examples besides Martin’s anonymous EP snub and the two Galloni issues? As has been said, this is nothing new for critics.

[Robert_M_yers]

@larry schaffer

Again, I don’t know the entire back story, but speaking from a winery’s perspective that has had wines panned by specific reviewers, using ‘specific words’ to convey, IMHO, ‘below the belt’ meanings, I have chosen in the past not to respond to reviewer’s requests to try my wines

Cheers.

We don’t need to out the reviewer but are the initials RMP

[Julian_Marshall]

It’s one thing having the right to refuse a critic, quite another it being the “right” thing to do. Huet’s behaviour towards Chris Kissack did them no favours and nor will this. It’ll be pretty obvious which wine, since it will be missing from the report. Obviously he’ll taste it in the future, so why bother? Quite ridiculous. If you don’t want criticism unless it’s a guaranteed good review, stay in bed or go to North Korea.

[Jayson_Cohen]

@Nola Palomar

Someone was left with a bad taste in their mouth.

Apparently Neal was left without a bad taste in his mouth.

[Eric_LaMasters]

@D@vid Bu3ker

@john stimson

As you know, there has been a rash of wineries uninviting Vinous reviewers, primarily Antonio (Giacosa, Aldo Conterno). Perhaps he just wanted to indicate what the reality is in general for reviewers. I think there is a value for a reviewer to show now and then that they aren’t just there to keep the winemaking estates happy and sell their wines for them. Of course who the reviewers’ primary audience is is another question.

A rash of wineries? Got any other examples besides Martin’s anonymous EP snub and the two Galloni issues? As has been said, this is nothing new for critics.

Maybach, Schrader, Realm.

[john_stimson]

Here’s Neal’s response on the Vinous board:

“Well, actually two producers. To be honest, given I’m been doing this a long time, I can think of only 4 producers that refused and one of them had nothing to do with me. I won’t name them. In fact, I completely respect their right to do so, even though it’s easy to just taste them elsewhere or buy them. It’s part of the territory of this job. It’s just frustrating when you hold no agenda and maybe have some constructive criticism that who knows, might help them. They don’t have to heed what I say. But when you stop listening (winemakers and wine critics alike), then the only party that loses is yourself.”

[larry_schaffer]

John,

I certainly would love to know more of the backstory here - i.e. what was written about these producers. Is it possible that the producers were ‘too sensitive’ and didn’t want to accept any criticism? Quite possible. Is it possible that something was said that perhaps was interpreted differently? That’s a possibility as well.

No one is infallible in this world . . .

[larry_schaffer]

And here is what Neal wrote on Facebook in response to everyone asking him to name the winery:

That is a lot of comments whilst I was flying back from Bordeaux last night. A couple of things. No, I’m not going to name the producer, or producers as there are two of them, because that would be a bit childish and wouldn’t achieve anything. That would be making a professional argument personal. Secondly, you won’t see who it was because I have already tasted their wines elsewhere (in fact, I did so before discovering I was not allowed to taste!) Thirdly, strange as it sounds, I believe that no winemaker has any obligation to show or submit samples to any wine critic. I am grateful that they do and when one to one, I always thank them for doing so. My gripe is more when specific people are targeted for no other reason than they are displeased with scores. Too often they digest numbers and don’t read my reasoning in the tasting note or accompanying text. That’s frustrating. Winemakers and wine writers should always read of listen/read even if they don’t agree with that view. It’s just frustrating when you feel that a winemaker is putting their hands over their ears whenever they hear something they don’t like. Listen/read and tell me I’m wrong. That’s perfectly fine as long as any discussion is kept professional and not personal.

Kudos to him for this post . . .

[Anton_D]

@john stimson

Here’s Neal’s response on the Vinous board:

“Well, actually two producers. To be honest, given I’m been doing this a long time, I can think of only 4 producers that refused and one of them had nothing to do with me. I won’t name them. In fact, I completely respect their right to do so, even though it’s easy to just taste them elsewhere or buy them. It’s part of the territory of this job. It’s just frustrating when you hold no agenda and maybe have some constructive criticism that who knows, might help them. They don’t have to heed what I say. But when you stop listening (winemakers and wine critics alike), then the only party that loses is yourself.”

I would call that quite a self-inflicted foot shot.

“Constructive criticism?”

“Might help them?”

“They don’t have to heed what I say.”

“But when you stop listening…then the only party that loses is yourself.”

I was a fan of the old Connoisseur’s Guide, so instead of puffs, I will give that statement three BS emojis.

1. Dude, you are a critic, not a consultant, so quit with the “constructive criticism” and “I’m only trying to help” bullshit right now. Buy a dictionary and look up some definitions.

2. Correct, they don’t “have to heed” what you say. It is not your job to tell them their job. It’s a sad and narcissistic thing when critics in any field of appreciation think that the artisans should heed what they have to say. That lack of personal insight is very telling. Really? Winemakers should “heed” what this person has to say? Welcome to the modern world of selfies making someone think they are important.

3. What does the critic think it is the job of a winery or winemaker to do, and why should the critic be allowed to insinuate himself into an endeavor by virtue of being able to pull a cork out of a bottle? After that craptastic self-defense self-promotion, I hope more wineries tell him to bugger off.

At first, when I saw that a winery had denied a taste to a member of the wine press at a large public event, I though it was a petty move by he winery. After reading his self aggrandizing mewling about it, I am sorry the winery didn’t graciously give him a large pour…right over his self absorbed head.

Maybe if the winery can buy him a mirror and have it delivered to his home we’d be spared having to hear from him again and we’d all be done with that sort of critic as consultant crap.

A pox upon that sort of attitude.

Bloviator.

[Anton_D]

@larry schaffer

And here is what Neal wrote on Facebook in response to everyone asking him to name the winery:

That is a lot of comments whilst I was flying back from Bordeaux last night. A couple of things. No, I’m not going to name the producer, or producers as there are two of them, because that would be a bit childish and wouldn’t achieve anything. That would be making a professional argument personal. Secondly, you won’t see who it was because I have already tasted their wines elsewhere (in fact, I did so before discovering I was not allowed to taste!) Thirdly, strange as it sounds, I believe that no winemaker has any obligation to show or submit samples to any wine critic. I am grateful that they do and when one to one, I always thank them for doing so. My gripe is more when specific people are targeted for no other reason than they are displeased with scores. Too often they digest numbers and don’t read my reasoning in the tasting note or accompanying text. That’s frustrating. Winemakers and wine writers should always read of listen/read even if they don’t agree with that view. It’s just frustrating when you feel that a winemaker is putting their hands over their ears whenever they hear something they don’t like. Listen/read and tell me I’m wrong. That’s perfectly fine as long as any discussion is kept professional and not personal.

Kudos to him for this post . . .

I admit to having an opposite response.

This blowhard makes a tasting note and he thinks it’s the duty of the winemaker to ‘listen/read and tell me I’m wrong?’

“G.F.Y” comes to mind.

Why the hell is the winery/winemaker expected to pay him any ‘heed’ at all? They are somehow obligated to enjoin him in dialogue because he says so?

I laughed when I saw what he said, thinking back to Hunter S Thompson’s “Hell’s Angels.” Hunter thought he was one of them until they showed him that he wasn’t.

Does this ‘critic’ refer to the wine industry as “we?”

[David_Bu3ker]

@Eric LaMasters

@D@vid Bu3ker

@john stimson

As you know, there has been a rash of wineries uninviting Vinous reviewers, primarily Antonio (Giacosa, Aldo Conterno). Perhaps he just wanted to indicate what the reality is in general for reviewers. I think there is a value for a reviewer to show now and then that they aren’t just there to keep the winemaking estates happy and sell their wines for them. Of course who the reviewers’ primary audience is is another question.

A rash of wineries? Got any other examples besides Martin’s anonymous EP snub and the two Galloni issues? As has been said, this is nothing new for critics.

Maybach, Schrader, Realm.

Any wines worth drinking?