Australians with moral standards? You read it here first…

By | 25/03/2013

Reading the first paragraphs of the 15th March edition of TWTW on the point-scoring between the point-scorers was an amusing enough experience. Though I couldn’t help but wonder if all the vitriol may in fact represent something other than petty jealousies and score settling.
Perhaps it is instead symptomatic of discomfort with the seemingly increasing acceptance of the wine-writing-gravy-train and all its attendant moral questionability. I suspect what is being seen here is the frustration with the turn wine writing has largely taken: not much beyond a combination of brainless shopping lists, paid-for-reviews and bloggers et al who think that being entitled to an opinion somehow equates to all opinions being equal.
Especially as all too often with the latter, even proper spelling and grammar is apparently too big an ask.
The quibbling over the likes of 99 or 100 point wine scores is almost a redundant debate though, so debased is that system. At least 99 points for Grange is a little more believable than the same for a second label Marlborough sauvignon blanc.
After all, it would be easier to respect wine ‘experts’ if indeed a) that’s what they actually are; b) they weren’t increasingly often beholden to pecuniary interests.
Though Nick Stock must have been chuffed by the illustrious company between whom he was concertinaed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *