False Truths in Print Media: The Credibility of Wine Blogs as a Publishing Tool Among the Circle of Wine Writers
What if man still used stone tools from 2.6 million years ago, never advancing to the hammer or pneumatic nail gun?
What if smoke signals were still used to communicate messages across long distances, instead of the digital phone or via chat?
What if man still traveled solely by foot or raft rather than by car, ship, plane or spacecraft?
What if Gutenberg’s creation of the printing press, first launched over 500 years ago, was considered the only viable tool to share information about wine?
Over the course of evolution, man has found newer, and at times, better ways of accomplishing a goal. Through logic, creativity and community, we have excelled past old ways of thinking and doing, by embracing change, growth and innovation.
The printing press is a tool that was, and still is, effective for its time. But times have changed, and with it has brought newer and faster ways of sharing ideas, communicating thoughts and presenting one’s perception on life democratically. Blogs are one of many such tools. Like the printing press, blogs are used to communicate information. Both the printing press and blogs are aimed at capturing the consumer’s attention, and both gain popularity based on reader’s reaction.
Where the misconception occurs is based on the authenticity and popularity of the content. While print media is judged by an “objective” editor, who gives the author due diligence, and at times, financial gain for their work, blogs can be created by anyone, and most often, without financial gain. However, with well over 800 international wine blogs on the internet, only those wine blogs that are publishing good, solid, interesting and authentic work on a regular basis will survive, grow and gain readership, as the readers have become the final editor. These are blogs that will receive comments, will be linked by other blogs and will be referred to within social networks, such as the Open Wine Consortium, which currently boasts of 2,000+ members related to the international wine trade. Social networks allow individuals to disseminate information to a wide reaching audience worldwide, and include social tasting note sites such as adegga and snooth. It is these blogs that will be shared on microblogging sites such as Twitter by online retailers @surf4wine, importers @bibendumwine, restaurants @galvinatwindows and @vinoteca, traditional wine writers @jamiegoode, and regional wine representatives @thirstforrioja. It is these blogs that will gain credibility, not necessarily based on name recognition, but rather, based on time. It is these blogs that are referred to as the “top wine blogs”, because they are doing legitimate research, publishing credible content, and are being referred to as “experts” on a given subject.
I am a wine blogger. I have dedicated my time, energy and passion to not only writing about Spanish and Portuguese wine on Catavino, but also to disseminating information about how to effectively promote wine education through Wineblogger and Catavino Marketing. Additionally, I am one of the founders of the very first Wine Bloggers Conference, which took place in La Rioja in August of last year, and has now become an annual event.
And because of this achievement, or so I thought, I was accepted into the much heralded, Circle of Wine Writers (CWW).
According to their home page, “The Circle of Wine Writers is an association of authors, broadcasters, journalists, photographers and lecturers who are professionally engaged in communicating about wines and spirits. It was founded in 1960 by the late Cyril Ray and now has more than 280 members and, although most of the membership is based in England, the Circle has members in countries around the world.”
Am I professionally engaged in communicating about wines and spirits? Absolutely! I live and breathe wine, spending a considerable part of my day educating consumers on the diversity of styles, indigenous grapes and quality coming from both Spain and Portugal. In addition, I help Iberian wineries use the internet efficiently so that they may effectively market their brand online in a more cost effective and practical manner.
In many ways, I am proud of my membership to CWW, feeling as if I add diversity to an age old organization that boasts membership of esteemed wine writers such as Jancis Robinson, Tom Cannavan and Charles Metcalfe. Therefore, you can imagine my shock when I recently read this letter in Off License News:
I would like to correct a perhaps misleading impression given – no doubt unintentionally – by Tim Atkin’s column, regarding the Circle of Wine Writers (Are wine critics a dying breed?, Jan 30)
It is true that our membership seems disproportionately large given evershrinking wine column inches, but many of our UK members are not wine journalists/ writers per se.
We boast a hugh number of wine lecturers and educators, as well as wine photographers, book and magazine editors and specialist spirit writers.
Tim is also correct in surmising that mostmembers struggle to make a decent living by wine communication alone, but many are quite content to be part-timers and do not wish to do more than make a regular contribution to a glossy magazine.
Full-time wine communication is certainly not a requirement of membership – we look for quality rather than quantity. Having said this, we do not accept applications from wine bloggers if this is all they write, however well they do it.
Finally, thank you, Tim, for championing the wine-writing cause.
Julie Arkell
Chairman of the Circle of Wine Writers
It is of no surprise that this comment took me completely off guard. Last I checked, I met their requirements of being professionally engaged in the wine sector. I work 60+ hours a week and am committed wholeheartedly to the mission of getting Iberian wines to the forefront of the consumer’s mind. My goal, from day one, has been to bring the consumer with me, in my own discovery of wine and the Iberian culture. Is this not part of the CWW mission? Is education, clear communication and professional engagement not the end goal? According to the CWW website, it is, “The objectives of the Circle of Wine Writers are to improve the standard of communication about wines, spirits and beers and to contribute to the growing knowledge and interest in wine”.
And unfortunately, unlike social media, allowing me to comment on this statement immediately in the comments, I am forced to leave a response to the editor of Off License News with no guarantee that my voice will be heard.
Wine blogging is a tool, a means of publishing content, and is not only comprised of wine writers, but of wine retailers, marketers, importers, exporters, distributors, critics, photographers and wineries. This tool should be no more an indication of my worth than if I was published in a magazine, newspaper, newsletter, brochure, pamphlet or billboard. It is my content that ought to be judged, not the way in which I publish it.
Next week, I am traveling with a group of CWW members across Castile y Leon, but at this point, I’m unclear if I technically qualify as a member. I have covered Spain and Portugal for over 3 years, and have done my level headed best to bring my readers the best content I can possibility provide. If my readers do not believe in my content, I give them full authority to tell me, to immediately correct my errors or participate in a debate on the site, so that we may engage in an open, honest and transparent dialogue. And because of this tool, and our philosophy to include the consumer in our travels every step of the way, I am happy to say, that to date, Catavino continues to gain readership.
My only hope is that CWW will step back momentarily and consider whether this comment was either accurate or fair. I believe in this organization, I trust that the comment was said without knowledge that wine bloggers are already in CWW, and I openly volunteer myself as a candidate to help CWW enter the world of social media so that both print and new media may work together to educate and inform the consumer about the culture of wine.
Gabriella Opaz
CWW member since May 2008
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_c.png?x-id=9cc46106-5c01-4407-a071-cd54bb166917)
Wineblogger.info was created by Catavino.net as a way to collate and track the many diverse and varied wine blogs. This project is open to offers of collaboration, suggestions as to how to improve and feedback of all sorts. As always, you can 
Subscribe
March 13th, 2009 at 8:20 am
Perhaps surrendering your membership of CWW (in a letter to Ms Arkell) is a good way to make your point!
Up until today I had aspirations of one day joining the CWW but, to be honest, it sounds like something of a dinosaur. We're constantly hearing about how people want to demystify wine and make it accessible to new audiences but Ms Arkell's comment makes the CWW sound like a bunch of old men sitting around in a club.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Excellent, Gabriella. I agree that the Chairman (sic) of the CWW appears to be in contraction with the published mission of the CWW itself. Moreover, saying that “we do not accept applications from wine bloggers if this is all they write, however well they do it” is a very strong, unambiguous statement which demands serious examination. They are rejecting potentially valuable members merely on the basis of the means they use to communicate, not on the basis of the quality of their content or the effectiveness of their communication. If they pursue this policy they will remain dinosaurs, and they will alienate huge volumes of wine enthusiastes. Would Gary Vaynerchuck, who is the world's most successful new media wine communicator, like him or not, qualify for membership of the CWW? Probably not. It is regrettable. Well done for stating your case.
On another note, if you don't mind my saying so, your title contains the expression “False Truths” which is a meaningless contradiction. Truths are true by definition and cannot be false. Only a claim can be false. Unless you're being ironic, but then I'm not sure what you mean. Just an observation.
March 13th, 2009 at 9:10 am
Hi Gabriella:
This is certainly a disturbng post, that indicates the prejudices of the Chairman toward blogging, as well as the fact she is ignorant of your membership in the group.
Though, I think you can make a strong argument that you write more than just a blog. Specifically, you have written a number of newsletters about Iberian wines, and that goes beyond “mere” blogging. So, by the words of the Chairman, you still would qualify as a member as you do write more than a blog.
March 13th, 2009 at 9:13 am
The future of wine communication is not in the hands those who control print media but rather consumers of wine information.
There is to much wasted energy in trying to work with the past. Hanging out in the past will only make you look out of touch with both today and tomorrow.
Good luck and continued success.
March 13th, 2009 at 9:31 am
This is an excellent point, Gabriella. Membership should be based on the quality of the writing and not the medium. Especially now when everything is moving to the internet.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Sorry Richard I would have to disagree with this. The newsletter is just an email from Catavino, written by a blogger from a blog, about what's happening on the blog. No editor, other than herself.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:06 am
[...] something. Anyways, this post is to point out the brilliant post she just did on Wineblogger.info. Read it and tell her your thoughts. Category: ThoughtsTags: Catavino.net > gabriella > wine > Writers [...]
March 13th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Thank you Gabriella,…
you do have my fully assistance in this case!! Congratulation for a great article, thank you for explainig what blogging about wine means.
Just be patient, the change will come, if they like it or not!! In germany print media is allready irrelevant. It…
March 13th, 2009 at 10:42 am
Congratulations on an excellent post, Gabriella. Personally I think that you and your writing are a credit to the Circle of Wine Writers and that as time goes on you will be a real asset to CWW once you are able to put your skills and knowledge of the Internet and social media to good use to help the organisation. As a long-standing member of CWW I’d like to comment on your post to put more perspective on these issues.
I am one of the members of CWW who has fully embraced social media and I’ve done this for two reasons. Firstly I have a website business that I dearly want to promote and secondly I’ve found it is a form of networking/communication that suits me personally, in that I can share some of my 30+ years of experience in wine in an easy way. I’m actually enjoying it.
I agree with most of your sentiments about the advantages of social media. One small correction: Open Wine Consortium (of which I am also a member) is an organisation that is only one year old and although it has some very serious/worthy professional wine people as members, it does not restrict its membership to those working in wine. There are many members who aspire to work in wine or become a writer/critic of wine. These are important points to consider in terms of how it conveys credibility onto blogs. But, as you have said it is the number of visitors to a blog that give a blog credibility, just as it’s the number of book buyers or circulation of magazines/newspapers that give credibility to print media. To me, these numbers are worryingly inconclusive, because who knows how many reading the blogs or magazines, or buying the books are actually fellow professionals. Credibility is a hard thing to measure and to obtain.
So, to come to your specific points about membership of CWW: Yes, like many British-based organisations, the CWW is slower to embrace modern technology than some. But, I’d like your readers to take note of the following. CWW is a voluntary organisation and therefore its ruling body – the committee – is not necessarily abreast of everything going on in the wider world of wine – it has no staff except a part-time administrator, so no full time PR person, no marketing manager and no internet advisor. It’s up to the committee to have its ear to the ground and in some ways up to ‘ordinary’ members of CWW to help the committee in its task. One mistake – and I believe that it was a mistake – of a committee member, in this case the Chairman, might cause a disproportionate amount of negative criticism.
You, Gabriella, were accepted into CWW on the basis of your experience and skills in communicating on wine. I feel sure and I certainly hope that in future, bloggers will be accepted to CWW if, and only if, they can demonstrate commitment, authority and experience in their writings and other communications on wine. Personally, I like to look at an old-fashioned (but still not deceased) medium as an equivalent – that of the local/regional newspaper columnist on wine. I am aware that there are CWW members whose published writing on wine appears just once a week or once a month in a local/regional newspaper. I am fairly sure that there have been applications from potential members that have been turned down because their column is the only form of wine communication they do and they probably don’t do it well enough. Most of the former do other communication activities in wine e.g. they run wine courses or monthly wine club tastings as well. The committee have to make a judgment on each application on its individual merits I believe.
Rather than dismiss the CWW as a dinosaur, let’s hope that this debate helps the organisation evolve. Bear in mind that blogs have been around for an incredibly short time – Alder Yarrow of Vinography, one of the early US-based wine bloggers, who speaks most years at the Napa Valley-sponsored Symposium for Professional Wine Writers said at the 2008 event that I attended, that just three years previously (in 2005) only a small fraction of the audience had even heard of blogs; by 2008 everyone had heard of blogs and about half the audience actually had one. I still speak to many people in the world of wine communication and beyond who have no idea what a blog is. It’s all very well for us to say: “Wake up, join us in the 21 century”, not everyone wants to or indeed has time to. Look what was said about the telephone when it was first invented “It will never catch on”.
Again, I applaud your post, Gabriella in bringing this debate into the open. I hope you enjoy your trip with members of CWW next week and meeting a cross-section of colleagues who all communicate about wine in different ways. And, let’s all try to work together for the greater good of communicating wine well.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:24 am
First off, I'd like to thank everyone for their positive feedback! I truly appreciate it.
Secondarily, I wholeheartedly agree you Wink, “Rather than dismiss the CWW as a dinosaur, let’s hope that this debate helps the organisation evolve”. This was goal from the beginning, and my only hope was for CWW to see value in various forms of publication available. As said, it only a tool, and if we shun people from using this tool effectively, we are only limiting the various ways we can reach the consumer. Thanks Wink for a very thoughtful comment.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Nice post. It is easy to expand your observations to a global dynamic. Social media is both a medium and a mind set. As a medium, it is no better or worse than the radio or an outdoor ad. As a medium, it has a multi-dimensional creative palette and a very low cost of production. In terms of a mind set, it is Darwin on steroids: every day it morphs to satisfy the needs of the environment. The environment is global, jaded, knowledgeable and ravenous. The environment's taste is ever-changing and discerning. If wine blogs continue to increase in popularity it is because they are relevant and valuable to the environment. The market, which no one can buy or sell, has spoken.
March 13th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
No need to apologize for disagreeing with me.
First, from the chairman's comments, I do not see where she indicates that having an “editor” is a requirement.
Second, though the newsletter is connected with your blog, I do recall that there was at least some original content in some of the newsletters, little extras for your readers.
March 13th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
No she does not say it, but this is often the arguement put forth by others as to what sets blogs apart from print. Whether it's true or not.
And while the “little extras” are just that, they are just for people who have subscribed to a newsletter through a blog, associated with a blog and nothing else.
Oh and apology retracted!
March 13th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
I really hope you get a response from them Gabriella! I'm anxious to hear what they have to say.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
congratulations Gabriella! good Job!
March 23rd, 2009 at 6:49 am
You know, my guess is that it was a personal, not thought through comment. But if it can bring some debate around the issue, it may have been good.
But really, it is not an issue. The medium is rather irrelevant. And I don't think that what was said will be a policy of the CWW.
But it (wine blogging) does raise one issue: Journalistic associations will have to “assess” potential members in a different way in the future, won't they? Just blogging doesn't necessarily qualify for being a member of a journalists' association. So there will have to be more vetting of some kind. Perhaps not a bad thing.
When television arrived, how long time did it take for TV reporters to be considered as journalists? They were just talking, not writing, so what's the value in that. Right?
On another note, it is curious how many journalistic associations seem to be rather behind their times in accepting and adopting new technologies and new ways of communicating. CWW is certainly not the only one. One would have thought that people making a living out of writing (or trying to) would jump on new opportunities. Or is it that they see it as a threat?
Or perhaps it is like many people's wine drinking: “I like to drink what I usually drink.” But the really interesting thing (in wine too) is to try the next thing, isn't it?
March 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Seems insane to me, Gabriella…..the prerequisite is that you are PAID for your wine writing, I guess? Even if it is a part-time endeavor. INSANE. Honestly, the caliber of writing that I see in many wine publications pales in comparison to some of the blog writing I've seen. I agree with others that perhaps surrendering your membership will make your voice heard.
April 24th, 2009 at 6:15 am
[...] have a little more respect for other wine journalists and do some research before making such silly statements. I’m sure there are a few blogs, though I know of none myself, that take direct money from [...]
April 25th, 2009 at 5:01 am
“Over the course of evolution, man has found newer, and at times, better ways of accomplishing a goal. Through logic, creativity and community, we have excelled past old ways of thinking and doing, by embracing change, growth and innovation.”
Man technologically progresses upon the achievements of those that came before. But the man of today is evolutionarily identical to the man using stone tools and smoke signals. Or, it is the technology that has evolved, not humankind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution
May 7th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
“Bravo” Gabriella for sticking the Catalan boot in a bit, intelligently and energetically, claro. Although I suspect the point was simply to avoid continuing, erm, stretching the precedent of people publishing stuff for free; as thus who needs “professional” wine communicators in the old sense? He says, as someone who earns virtually bugger all from his wine website (which might well be expanded and connected to a 'proper' blog at some point). But i do have plans, as always…
Cheers, salut.
Richard
http://www.winewriting.com, http://www.winetravelguides.com
May 14th, 2009 at 7:31 am
Just getting around to reading this (shame on me!). Late to the party…
Anyway, it's all rather… disturbing! Perhaps the name should be changed to CWWEBITIATW (Circle of Wine Writers Excluding Bloggers If That Is All They Write). Their stance does relegate blogs to a different (& presumably lower) class of writing.
Which I find… odd. Wonder what they'd think of wine bloggers going on press junkets with print media journalists (like I'm doing next week – if only now just to piss them off!)?
May 18th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
I have been a member of the Circle of Wine Writers for 20 years and editor of its newsletter, Circle Update, since 1991. Over this time the Circle has evolved embracing lecturers and photographers and becoming increasing international. Personally I trust it will continue to evolve and that wine bloggers will become part of its membership.
I suggest that Julie Arkell's remarks should be put in context – hitherto the Circle has been an association of people who earn a living either in part or wholly from communicating about wine. The rise of the net and the decline of print opportunities – both magazines and books is changing this dynamic. Few bloggers earn a living from blogging, so one of the criteria used previously to judge whether someone qualifies as a member of the Circle is probably no longer fully applicable.
The Circle's committee is well aware of the change but as Wink Lorch points out in her post change takes time and Gabriella's post has, I think, moved this process along.
Clearly there are blog and blogs and the fact of having a blog is unlikely to be sufficient to give someone membership. I think it is likely that it will be down to the quality of the blog, its audience etc.
NB This post is my own view – I'm not a member of the Circle's committee.
May 18th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Thank you all for taking the time to comment! I realize that this is a rather heated topic, and if anything, I think it has given us loads to consider in relationship to the future of wine writing. As Jim and Joe have both accurately pointed out, the definition of a wine writer has changed dramatically. However, what may come out of this, or so I hope, is that we have a better chance to evaluate what is quality wine writing, rather than the tool to facilitate the conversation. There are loads of poor print writers, as much as there are heaps of poor wine blog writers. If we can judge each one on their individual merits, as each is aimed at a different audience, it may give us pause on how we can better connect to the future consumer. Keep in mind, this transition and/or transformation is not limited to CWW. These questions are confronting all levels of communication in every sector, and I'm truly excited to see how it evolves.