Robert Parker, Dr. Vino and paying for wine

This has, once again, turned into a big stink among the wine types who hang out in the cyber ether. Blogger Tyler Colman, whose Dr. Vino is among the top-visited wine blogs on the Internet, has taken Robert Parker to task for allegedly not paying for all of the wines that Parker's empire reviews. Parker, of course, runs the Wine Advocate and is the most important person in the wine world.

Does Parker buy the wine he and his tasters write about? Parker says yes, mostly. Colman says no, and wonders why Parker isn't more forthright about sampling. The Wine Curmudgeon says: "Who cares?"

Should Parker be upfront about which wine is purchased and which is sampled (the practice where producers give wines to writers to review). Yes. Is it the most important problem facing the wine world? No, and I truly don't understand why this keeps coming up. Has Dr. Vino written about critic Jancis Robinson, the anti-Parker, and how she uses samples? I couldn't find any evidence that he has.

Criticize Parker for having too much influence. Criticize Parker for inventing the 100-point scoring system. Criticize Parker for his palate, which prefers powerful, fruity, high-alcohol, oaky wines. Criticize Parker because the Italians, French and Spanish make wine that tastes like it came from California's Central Coast in order to play to his palate. Criticize Parker because companies now exist to help winemakers manipulate grapes to make wines that play to his palate.

Those are the problems facing the wine world, not whether Robert Parker hedges about samples. Yes, taking on Parker generates lots of comments and repeat visits to a blog or Web site. But it doesn't help anyone make better wine.

Robert Parker, Dr. Vino, wine samples

Comments

[Michael Wangbickler]

One minor correction Jeff. Parker runs the Wine Advocate, not the Wine Enthusiast.

I don't think Tyler takes exception to Parker accepting media samples. This is, after all, how the world of wine criticism works. I believe Tyler's point is that Parker is misleading his readers in his assertions of unbiased reviews because he himself purchases the wines instead of receiving it from wineries themselves. He and his critics receive thousands of samples and often visit regions where they are hosted by wineries. I think we all just want truth in advertising.

[Jeff Siegel]

That's not a small mistake, confusing Enthusiast and Advocate. I should know better. Thanks for correcting it, and I fixed the post.

I don't disagree with truth in advertising, Mike. I just don't think it's that big a deal. For all the criticism Parker takes, even from someone as relatively insignificant as me, no one accuses him of being biased in the way many people accuse the Wine Spectator of bias. If this discussion is about Parker and his reviewers favoring certain wines because the wineries offer trips or samples, then say so.

[Alfonso Cevola]

Another assertion I have heard from another wine writer (in Canada) is that she tastes "over 10,000 wines per year". That's 27 bottles a day. Now while I won't say it is impossible, it sounds like a stretch.