Even as a professional wine writer, I am far too apologetic (though sometimes I wonder why).
It struck me today that people who create things (art, music, food, wine or anything really) tend to champion their creations so strongly that they are easily blinded by criticism, even the constructive kind.
Call me a zealot, but I’m a sucker for criticism and feedback. I believe that open communication and constructive commentary on products and services is how we can best improve them. For this single reason, I love open internet forums where we can talk about wine… this blog, for example.
I might be nuts, but I’ve noticed lately that some winemakers defend their wines to the point of chastising reviewers for publishing their honest thoughts. Sure, I understand that if a wine receives a few ‘bad reviews’ from various Mr Joe-Nobodies then some punters will come across those reviews and disembark from the purchasing bandwagon. To be honest, if amateur reviewers agree en masse that a wine isn’t great, then chances are you shouldn’t buy it either. Despite the negative effect criticism may have on wine sales, wine (like art) is subjective and people are absolutely entitled to voice their opinions (even the negative ones).
Flicking through an online wine forum last week, I was confronted by a winemaker’s comments to an ‘amateur reviewer’. The winemaker came from an obscure part of South Africa. He chastised Mr Amateur Reviewer for negatively reviewing his most expensive wine and publishing the notes online. He said “Why did you say my wine had an unnecessarily strong acidic backbone? Why do you think the wine doesn’t taste ready to drink yet? Great, now nobody will buy it in Australia”. (Well, not quite true sir. If I may butt in, Aussies would still buy your wine here to cellar it…if it weren’t so overpriced).
Anyway, Mr Amateur Reviewer correctly asserted that a strong acidic backbone is necessary in nearly all good wines. Without sufficient acidity most wines (especially whites) fall flat on the palate and are ‘boring’. He also highlighted that he still gave the wine 92 points (of 100) – a fairly high score. For Mr Amateur Reviewer, the wine was far too acidic for the varietal. He felt that the acidity and high alcohol content overpowered the fruit flavours and aromas, so that’s what he wrote. I reckon that’s pretty fair – if that’s what he truly tasted in the glass.
It’s a bit disappointing Mr Winemaker didn’t think to ask how or why Mr Amateur Reviewer thought those things.
Personally, I dislike winemakers who arc up over negative reviews. Firstly, your wine should be good and reliable – no excuses. If it’s not, then throw the blasted stuff out during production. Bad wine should never reach the bottling process. Secondly, if you do receive a few negative reviews why not find out why, and then work on correcting the issues next vintage. Never, ever chastise your punters, especially those who are active enough to write about your wines. What do you think they’re going to write about next? Yes, that’s right… your bad behaviour! Even if the wine issues are purely a seasonal concern, it would be pragmatic to understand the basis for any negative opinions. From the next vintage, work to correctly segment your market and you can receive valuable returns by way of positive reviews by happy punters. Please them, don’t chastise them.
So, my dear readers, I want to put it out there that when you’re reading a review, try to remember that it’s only the opinion of (usually) one person. As such, don’t decide whether to purchase based only on that single review. Read around, shop around.. whatever you want to call it – get educated by your peers online.




