Parker Addresses Wine Writers; Closure of eBob to Nonsubscribers

[Richard_T_r_i_m_p_i]

Thanks Richard.

Good for RMP to attend this event and discuss his positions, which overall seem consistent if considerably less bombastic. With the chronic back pain issues and invasive surgery, no wonder he’s been cranky. Unfortunately, he doesn’t look too healthy in the photos.

He definitely threw Squires under the bus. What Mark was doing as administrator was not done in secret. If RMP wanted more leniency and/or accessibility, why is there a pay wall? Kindness?

RT

[Scot_H]

Not surprisingly, the biggest influencers, with a mean rating of six, were buyers’ wine knowledgeable friends. Second most influential were wine shop staff, with a rating of 5.3 As far as major publications, Wine Spectator had the highest mean rating of influence at 4.7. Wine Enthusiast followed with a 4.4 score. A high Parker rating in TWA rated only 4.1.

What? WE is more influential than the WA?

[Paul_Jaouen]

He looks awful.

[Anton_D]

@D@vid R0sewater

@Anton D

He doesn’t look so bad.

Sort of going for a later Howard Hughes thing, only with better finger nails.

Hope he isn’t aging his urine in jars.

At least you know it would be able to age on its alcohol content.

[Peter_Kleban]

@D@vid R0sewater

@Anton D

He doesn’t look so bad.

Sort of going for a later Howard Hughes thing, only with better finger nails.

Hope he isn’t aging his urine in jars.

At least you know it would be able to age on its alcohol content.

And no chance of it fooling the AFWE

[Loren_Sonkin]

Thanks Richard.

I have been and remain a fan of Parker. I don’t mind the brash style, although it certainly costs gives his critics fodder. I find his reviews very consistent and no less limiting than many who dismiss the wines he likes and bash him for liking them. I happen to like orange wines and certainly some of the Loire Red wines he dislikes, but so what? I also happen to like SQN, Saxum and 2003 Pavie. So what? If Parker or anyone else doesn’t like it, it makes for a fun discussion. Its a shame the Squires BB put the wall up but I don’t think anyone can say with a straight face that BB was not a wild and disrespectful place at times. Parker at his worst, and I will grant you he had his moments, was not as ill behaved as many on that BB (and he was footing the bill). Heck, even Todd has his detractors for censorship on this BB. Some days you just can’t win.

I wonder how many of us would put with someone publishing books with out names in their titles, just to make a name for themselves? How many bloggers wrote about this speech (second one I saw today) only to be followed by everyone feeling that gives them the right to say what Parker’s faults are? Classic in America, build them up, tear them down.

As for the appearance remarks, reminds me of The Who when they played the Superbowl (or even the RHCP this year). Its hard to watch people that we knew young, get old. The fact that he appeared, requiring two canes, says more to me than disheveled hair or a scraggly beard. He could have easily skipped this appearance, but must have felt it worthwhile for some reason. I suspect it wasn’t about the money.

[Ian_Dorin]

Outstanding writing Richard, and tremendous question.

[Walt_Hoehler]

Orson Welles Drunk Outtakes for Paul Masson Wine Commercial

[Beau_Carufel]

As I read through the (wonderful) article Richard wrote, I kept thinking that by all appearances, Mr. Parker has zero idea how little credibility he has with my (31 years old) generation of wine lovers. His subscriber base is dying off, literally. I’ve yet to see any movement from The Wine Advocate towards attracting a younger audience and building credibility with that audience. Oh well.

[Neal.Mollen]

@Loren Sonkin

Thanks Richard.

I have been and remain a fan of Parker. I don’t mind the brash style, although it certainly costs gives his critics fodder. I find his reviews very consistent and no less limiting than many who dismiss the wines he likes and bash him for liking them. I happen to like orange wines and certainly some of the Loire Red wines he dislikes, but so what? I also happen to like SQN, Saxum and 2003 Pavie. So what? If Parker or anyone else doesn’t like it, it makes for a fun discussion. Its a shame the Squires BB put the wall up but I don’t think anyone can say with a straight face that BB was not a wild and disrespectful place at times. Parker at his worst, and I will grant you he had his moments, was not as ill behaved as many on that BB (and he was footing the bill). Heck, even Todd has his detractors for censorship on this BB. Some days you just can’t win.

I wonder how many of us would put with someone publishing books with out names in their titles, just to make a name for themselves? How many bloggers wrote about this speech (second one I saw today) only to be followed by everyone feeling that gives them the right to say what Parker’s faults are? Classic in America, build them up, tear them down.

As for the appearance remarks, reminds me of The Who when they played the Superbowl (or even the RHCP this year). Its hard to watch people that we knew young, get old. The fact that he appeared, requiring two canes, says more to me than disheveled hair or a scraggly beard. He could have easily skipped this appearance, but must have felt it worthwhile for some reason. I suspect it wasn’t about the money.

Loren, I agree with a lot of what you say, but to me he isn’t brash; he is arrogant and unnecessarily dismissive. He is entitled to his views – and to express them unambiguously – but he treats those who simply disagree as cretins. I can’t stand that kind of attitude, from him or from his critics (who are often no better)

[dougwilder]

I think Antonio brought a couple fundamental improvements to the publication, namely the videos as well as including the website instead of just the phone number on reviews. Still can’t figure out why this isn’t a hyperlink though.

[W_Leonard]

@Kyle Schlachter

I am very surprised that this quote hasn’t attracted more attention…

“I want to leave some kind of legacy in Asia. I started going there in 1998. In China, although the government is a dictatorship, there is robust capitalism. The people there are great students and fast learners. They’re too respectful to challenge you on anything, but they’re learning. They’ve read all the books.”

Yeah the other one is this : “I went to France to protect my investment.” He is referring to his wife, a human being and not a thing… Seemingly inconsequential, these sorts of statements are very alienating. This industry has a feeling of a boy’s club and subtleties like that one can be really off putting and sadly reconfirming. Maybe I read too much into things but that leaped out at me, big time.

[ryan_zepaltas]

Thanks for posting Richard. A great read!

[Peter_Kleban]

Yes, thanks Richard. Definitely worth reading, well done!

[Bill_Klapp_deactivated]

@Loren Sonkin

Thanks Richard.

I have been and remain a fan of Parker. I don’t mind the brash style, although it certainly costs gives his critics fodder. I find his reviews very consistent and no less limiting than many who dismiss the wines he likes and bash him for liking them. I happen to like orange wines and certainly some of the Loire Red wines he dislikes, but so what? I also happen to like SQN, Saxum and 2003 Pavie. So what? If Parker or anyone else doesn’t like it, it makes for a fun discussion. Its a shame the Squires BB put the wall up but I don’t think anyone can say with a straight face that BB was not a wild and disrespectful place at times. Parker at his worst, and I will grant you he had his moments, was not as ill behaved as many on that BB (and he was footing the bill). Heck, even Todd has his detractors for censorship on this BB. Some days you just can’t win.

I wonder how many of us would put with someone publishing books with out names in their titles, just to make a name for themselves? How many bloggers wrote about this speech (second one I saw today) only to be followed by everyone feeling that gives them the right to say what Parker’s faults are? Classic in America, build them up, tear them down.

As for the appearance remarks, reminds me of The Who when they played the Superbowl (or even the RHCP this year). Its hard to watch people that we knew young, get old. The fact that he appeared, requiring two canes, says more to me than disheveled hair or a scraggly beard. He could have easily skipped this appearance, but must have felt it worthwhile for some reason. I suspect it wasn’t about the money.

Loren, I am not inclined to argue with you, but I find this remarkably naive at this late date…

[Bob_Kaminski]

Well, he suffers a modern affliction that many now endue and inflict on others…narcissism

[larry_schaffer]

@Bill Klapp

@Loren Sonkin

Thanks Richard.

I have been and remain a fan of Parker. I don’t mind the brash style, although it certainly costs gives his critics fodder. I find his reviews very consistent and no less limiting than many who dismiss the wines he likes and bash him for liking them. I happen to like orange wines and certainly some of the Loire Red wines he dislikes, but so what? I also happen to like SQN, Saxum and 2003 Pavie. So what? If Parker or anyone else doesn’t like it, it makes for a fun discussion. Its a shame the Squires BB put the wall up but I don’t think anyone can say with a straight face that BB was not a wild and disrespectful place at times. Parker at his worst, and I will grant you he had his moments, was not as ill behaved as many on that BB (and he was footing the bill). Heck, even Todd has his detractors for censorship on this BB. Some days you just can’t win.

I wonder how many of us would put with someone publishing books with out names in their titles, just to make a name for themselves? How many bloggers wrote about this speech (second one I saw today) only to be followed by everyone feeling that gives them the right to say what Parker’s faults are? Classic in America, build them up, tear them down.

As for the appearance remarks, reminds me of The Who when they played the Superbowl (or even the RHCP this year). Its hard to watch people that we knew young, get old. The fact that he appeared, requiring two canes, says more to me than disheveled hair or a scraggly beard. He could have easily skipped this appearance, but must have felt it worthwhile for some reason. I suspect it wasn’t about the money.

Loren, I am not inclined to argue with you, but I find this remarkably naive at this late date…

I know I shouldn’t do this, but heck, I’m feeling a little ‘snarky’ right now . . .

Bill, care to illuminate us which parts of Loren’s post you ‘remarkably naive’ at this point?

Cheers . . . .

[Chris_S_p_i_k_e_s]

@W. Leonard

Yeah the other one is this : “I went to France to protect my investment.” He is referring to his wife, a human being and not a thing… Seemingly inconsequential, these sorts of statements are very alienating. This industry has a feeling of a boy’s club and subtleties like that one can be really off putting and sadly reconfirming. Maybe I read too much into things but that leaped out at me, big time.

I’m no defender of Parker, but I’m about 99% sure he’s attempting to be humorous here. If you have heard his story about that time, it’s clear that his was almost a puppy love and he was missing his [future] wife so much he couldn’t be without her. She, clearly didn’t feel the same at the time, otherwise she never would have gone. Good for both of them. He didn’t go to put the leash around her.

[Richard_Jennings]

@Mike Cohen

Thanks Richard. I appreciate the information. A couple of thoughts:

1. He really throws Squires under the bus. Wow. As a side note, is Squires still the guy in charge at eBob?

2. Surprised (but maybe not) at his physical condition. I guess all that travel and living of the good life takes a toll.

3. Asking him for what he sees as future opportunities for wine writers is a great question, but the fact that he doesn’t give an answer that is satisfactory isn’t that surprising. So much has happened from a technology standpoint since Parker started his career that it doesn’t surprise me that he isn’t as up to speed on what’s next out there. I would suspect this is one of the many reasons that he cashed out. As an aside, my Grandfather started an apparel manufacturing company from scratch. It took a lot of guts and even more hard work to make it a successful company. But it took his sons (with new and innovative ideas) to take the company to the next level and into the next generation of manufacturing and sales practices. Parker came along at a fortuitous time and put in the hard work and guts to become successful. Now he is handing the proverbial wine writing reins to the next generation of writers and it’s their job to figure out where the opportunities lie.

4. It takes a really special personality to ignore or shrug off criticism for a long period. Now I tend to agree with much of the criticism that was aimed at Parker, but the sheer volume has to get to a guy and to me, it’s no surprise that Parker didn’t handle it perfectly. Most people don’t. Discussion forums can be great places to learn and build relationships, but they can also be tough on both the participants and those whose business or product we are discussing.

Mike,

Thank you for the thoughtful comments.

I think you’re absolutely right in your point # 3. I think Antonio Galloni with his http://vinousmedia.com/ is doing an impressive job of showing some of the ways that new media can be employed to better communicate on wine topics.

As to your question in # 1, I don’t know the answer for sure. I cancelled my subscription to TWA on principle after Parker closed down the bulletin board to non-subscribers in 2010. I suspect Mark still has his old job there, but hopefully a current subscriber can confirm

[Richard_Jennings]

@TomHill

Great article, Richard…and pretty even-handed treatment, I thought, of him.

A couple of points:

1. The NYTimes columnist was TerryRobards, not Harry. Don’t know if that was yours or his mistake.

2. I don’t believe that that was correct that PenfoldsGrange was not imported into the US in '78. I seem to recall
   seeing it up in Boulder in the mid-'70’s…but I could be wrong.

3. As Mike says, he certainly did throw Squires under the bus. Deservedly so, perhaps.

4. I won’t comment on his appearance because it always peeved me when these reporters would attend a
   CondyRice press briefing and would preface their article about what dress she was wearing.

5. In his response to Jon’s pointed question (good for you, Jon) he says: “it’s a mistake to have a formula to pick grapes at a lower brix”.
   The same can be said of higher brix as well. Formulas for winemaking are always a mistake. I don’t think any of these winemakers
   who prefer lower alcohol wines doing anything by “formula”, least not the ones I know.

6. In “this argument w/ AdamTolmach”: “…people making those wines should trash those that are big and alcoholic”. I guess I can’t recall
   anything that Adam has ever said that I could characterize as “trashing” those wines. Quite an overstatement. Applies to a lot of those winemakers.
   Most of them state outright the style of wines they wish to makel; but that does not constitute “trashing” the wines that don’t fit that mold.

7. It seems that you did pick up an underlying thread of arrogance that often comes thru in Parker’s screeds and that he seemed to go out
   of his way to downplay.

Thanks for sharing that with us, Richard.

Tom

Tom,

Thank you for the additional information and commentary.

I very much appreciate your correction in #1, which I’ve made on the blog.

As to Parker’s comments, I heard them as throwing Squires under the bus, and was really surprised by his candor on that issue. That said, I have to report that I had a conversation with Squires in April 2007, at an OL in San Francisco thrown in his honor, about censorship and removals of people from the eBob bulletin board. He told me that Parker, who paid his salary to run the board, made the decisions on who should be banned from the board. Maybe that changed by 2010, but Mark made it clear that, in 2007 at least, those were RMP’s decisions, not his. I would expect, however, that Mark was solely responsible for the sometimes blistering language he reportedly used in conveying some of those decisions.

I agree with your point 5. I think the whole “formula” argument is a weak straw man. As to your comment # 6, I am very much looking forward to getting Adam’s response in person when I meet with him early next week (a long planned visit).