The Auswine Forum

Reviews for wines not tasted or released? One way to keep the publication current?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wine/news/article.cfm?c_id=365&objectid=10605882

I'll stick my neck out & say if Skinner is reviewing wines he either a) hasn't tasted or b) were barrel samples, then I hope his "career" comes to a halt because of it. There are many ethical wine writers out there. If Skinner is guilty then he risks tarnishing those who aren't.

Cooper's keeping the industry honest, it seems - wasn't it Cooper who picked up on the Wither Hills issue in 06? This is pretty funny to my mind. Not good for Skinner at all...

jeremy wrote:I'll stick my neck out & say if Skinner is reviewing wines he either a) hasn't tasted or b) were barrel samples, then I hope his "career" comes to a halt because of it. There are many ethical wine writers out there. If Skinner is guilty then he risks tarnishing those who aren't.

Tough as always Jeremy. I mean this in a nice way . Not defending him as I (like you) don't know the exact circumstances, but I am sure there are other critics out there who have rated wines based on barrel samples. Is that a (wine) crime?

Discuss.

Michael

Mr Skinner probably has a good palate etc.. Good on him for making a name for himself when so many would like to.

But I suspect he's more in marketing and advertising than wine...... It's a living after all. (OK,I'm jealous )

Hopefully these were barrel samples, not guesswork based on previous vintages. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in the meantime.

Cheers
TiggerK

Michael McNally wrote:

jeremy wrote:I'll stick my neck out & say if Skinner is reviewing wines he either a) hasn't tasted or b) were barrel samples, then I hope his "career" comes to a halt because of it. There are many ethical wine writers out there. If Skinner is guilty then he risks tarnishing those who aren't.

Tough as always Jeremy. I mean this in a nice way . Not defending him as I (like you) don't know the exact circumstances, but I am sure there are other critics out there who have rated wines based on barrel samples. Is that a (wine) crime?

Discuss.

Michael

Well, as always my experience isn't great BUT.. I tend to think along the lines that a reviewer should review a product when it is available for purchase (or when they taste or receive it I guess). My understanding is that barrel samples are still maturing, bottling effects a wine and if a producer releases a wine before it has recovered from potential bottle shock a reviewer should still call what is in front of him/her and just note that they think the wine has been released too early. All of this provides more valuable information to the reader thak the guess work of reviewing a barrel sample. I might be wrong...

Michael McNally wrote:

jeremy wrote:I'll stick my neck out & say if Skinner is reviewing wines he either a) hasn't tasted or b) were barrel samples, then I hope his "career" comes to a halt because of it. There are many ethical wine writers out there. If Skinner is guilty then he risks tarnishing those who aren't.

Tough as always Jeremy. I mean this in a nice way . Not defending him as I (like you) don't know the exact circumstances, but I am sure there are other critics out there who have rated wines based on barrel samples. Is that a (wine) crime?

Discuss.

Michael

Doing it is not a "crime", but doing it and not mentioning it is.

If these things are true then isn't the biggest issue the intention behind it - i.e. the intention is purely to release a book that will sell (i.e. a purely marketing exercise) rather than actually provide useful information to the consumer.

Seems like a plan that may have limited long term success (eg. short term success at the cost of credibility and long term success) - of course as long as the consumer perceives they are getting value (even if they are not) I suppose it may work.

Red Bigot wrote:Doing it is not a "crime", but doing it and not mentioning it is.

Agreed.

Bit of a conundrum for this writer. He should have made clear what he based his notes on. I always do, even if it's a preliminary barrel sample. It's not that uncommon for a wine writer who has commercial interests with a company to review their wines pre-release, by tasting the barrel sample. The problem here is that many wine writers don't get to do this often - they don't get to taste wine in barrels all that often - instead they focus on the end (developing) product in the bottle. Winemakers, on the other hand, have this experience. I can count on two hands the number of winemakers I've met who can accurately predict how a wine will develop in bottle by tasting a preliminary barrel sample. So, in short, it can be done and it can be accurate - but I don't know if I'd trust this!

This is a feeling not sure how accurate but with an 'elite' winery like Te Mata Im not sure how chummy they really need to be when it comes to dishing out any pre release tastings to wine writers, even the most influential NZ and international writers let alone ones hardly heard of in NZ.

I think they may have a media pre release which is a matter of days before the public showcase but I dunno why Te Mata would feel any need to give barrel tastings months before to all and sundry

Its a long trip to napier from aussie

Thinking out loud only. I really have no idea

Here is Skinner's response

http://www.decanter.com/news/291766.html

I think it is pathetic and totally lacking in integrity. Anyone think otherwise?

Terrible. As Matt says... "there are some releases that are consistent from year to year, and as popular, good value and accessible wines I want to include them because I know that my readers will appreciate them."

Recommending megablends to the masses coz they'll like it.

The goal is cash in. Release a book to put on coffee tables rather than actually provide useful reviews.

Yep pathetic. Their responses as to why they did it are also disgraceful and totally disrespectful to their audience.

They are saying that they did it because that is what their audience are looking for. True the audience may want recommendations on current release wines which they can access but I think it unlikely they want a recommendation and a tasting note that is based on previous releases of a wine (especially without any indication that this is what is being done).

I assume given the nature of the book that they are expecting a large part of their audience are not people that will be on forums like this and even discover this is what he is done (i.e. even if he gets caught out it may not impact sales significantly). Sadly I can imagine somebody getting me this for Christmas.

I guess they have to give responses like this because if they told the truth and said something like the following then they would get worse backlash - to maximise our book sales we treat our audience like fools and assume they will never find out that we have not tasted the wines we recommend and then we focus on the presentation and marketing of the book.

See this has made its way onto ninemsn.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/entertainmen ... fends-tips

Thought I'd wait and see what response was from Camp Skinner before commenting.

Unbelievably shabby is the comment now. This is fairly indicative though of the level of quality we can expect in future from the "Oh I'm awfully busy balancing my media commitments" style content providers. A few years back, a couple of US studios were exposed for having created non-existent reviewers who would comment favourably upon films owned by the studios, and then be quoted back in advert in the press!

I read his breezy little column in the Sunday papers here, but that's over Matt. You're dropped baby.

I used to have a lot of time for Skinner, even though his prose used to make me want to punch his face in.

However, hard to look at this as anything other than a) cheap journalism, or b) stupidity

Poor show.

This is the full statement from his website - has anybody seen the page 2 disclaimer he refers to (could be quite relevant).

http://www.mattskinner.net/Matt_Skinner/Update.html

Honestly, my care factor was only just enough to read his statement.

It is without doubt the biggest load of drivel I have ever read.

I haven't seen the disclaimer, and its relevance would only be to pharisees. Once again Skinner has distinguished himself as someone lacking basic ethics and inable to ackonwledge his own mistakes. It stinks to high heaven. If he is the person to "introduce" others to wine then may god help wine. A sorry state of affairs. I have no time for him or his excuses. I hope he reaps what he sows. Harsh? Maybe, but this is enough to make many (even more) cynical about wine.

It's bullshit, and I have no problem calling it as such.

It gives new meaning to the adage "you can't judge a book by its cover", in this case "always read the disclaimer first"

jeremy wrote:I haven't seen the disclaimer, and its relevance would only be to pharisees. Once again Skinner has distinguished himself as someone lacking basic ethics and inable to ackonwledge his own mistakes. It stinks to high heaven. If he is the person to "introduce" others to wine then may god help wine. A sorry state of affairs. I have no time for him or his excuses. I hope he reaps what he sows. Harsh? Maybe, but this is enough to make many (even more) cynical about wine.

It's bullshit, and I have no problem calling it as such.

Jeremy, I'm sure I've told you before about sitting on the fence; when are you going to tell us how you really feel?

I have to agree that this has tarnished his reputation and it'll be interesting to see a) how sales of this book go and b) if he hangs onto his numerous commitments (i.e. the Age Column)

Personally I'm disappointed as I think he has a real joy de vie when he writes about wine. I've spoken to people that used to work with him at the Prince, and they have nothing but praise for him. Shame really.