Barbera 7, Other Nonsense and Advice from the Old Fisherman

J

Joe Dressner

Joe Dressner
The old fisherman has been throwing his bait into the wine ocean for years and has learned many lessons about how to catch good fish.

One of the key lessons is to avoid freebies sponsored by trade associations, government groups, AOCs and other such organizations.

You will get a free trip and have to taste all the most horrible wines produced in the organization's area. They're not paying your way for your critical sensibility -- they want some promotion for what they are actually producing not what an American blogger imagines they should produce.

Honestly, to accept such a trip (unless you've only recently taking up fishing and don't know how to catch a live one) and then criticize the organizers for betraying your critical sensibilities can only be called impolite.

Be critical on your own dime!
 
The April 20th tasting for the trade in San Francisco will it be featuring the usual Crystal, Russian caviar, topless dancers, and catered food from Gary Danko's as usual? I just know I'll be able to place an order if that is so.
 
Provin' any fish bites if ya' got good bait,
Here's a little tip that I would like to relate.
Many fish bites if ya' got good bait.

Taj Mahal
 
originally posted by Joe Dressner:
They're not paying your way for your critical sensibility -- they want some promotion...
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be simpler to buy ads in a newspaper than to attempt to manipulate notoriously wayward bloggers?
 
i like fishing, but i never fish from concrete tank pools. most of those fish have several different fins that i don't recognize.
 
If you give a blogger a fish, he's full for a night
If you teach a blogger to fish, he'll carp endlessly.

-- anon y mouse
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Joe Dressner:
They're not paying your way for your critical sensibility -- they want some promotion...
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be simpler to buy ads in a newspaper than to attempt to manipulate notoriously wayward bloggers?
Click to expand...
You know, I suspect there's a cultural conflict, or a poorly bridged cultural gap. The traditions understood by the old fisherman were established in a bygone age of print. The trusty unlocked trunk of the car, filled with nasty barbera? No, wait, maybe it was 2nd growths. Anyhow, I forget. But I suspect that the rules of politeness established in the days of the old fisheries are in a bit of flux as the new unpaid media tries to figure out how it all works. Maybe they didn't get the memo, or maybe the PR folks assumed they'd understand the old rules would apply.

But instead, it's like sending a copy of your book on matching food and wine to the old fisherman. He might review the damn thing!
 
Perhaps SF Joe is right.

But you wonder not only about the wisdom of these people who finance such junkets but also the worthies who accept their money, along with disclaimers on the bottom of their blogs how they've accepted someone's money. Don't the bribed share the blame for knowingly entering into such a corrupt relation? Doesn't it question your credibility when you accept money to attend events you know you're going to hate in advance of attending them? That's no way to build up a readership or a following.

Alignment.

We need to bring a new alignment.

Bad blogging and bad writing stink. Critical independence is sadly lacking.
 
originally posted by Joe Dressner:
Doesn't it question your credibility when you accept money to attend events you know you're going to hate in advance of attending them?
Click to expand...

There is an assumption here that is unwarranted, at least in the case of some of the Barbera Boys who post on this board. We're not all old fishermen, and some of us cast our lines with less wizened experience.
 
I can think about the truth until green turns red,
But I think maybe I'll just go fishin instead,
Cause you know, I'm pretty sure I'll end up where I belong...
 
Joe, with all immense due respect, being paid to review is entirely different from being paid to give a positive review. Surely only the second is a bribe, no? I agree with you that it's impolite to criticize when you're invited to someone's home, but don't see an etiquette problem with being financed by a business to evaluate a product and then give your true opinion.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
...being paid to review is entirely different from being paid to give a positive review. Surely only the second is a bribe, no?
Click to expand...
It depends who is paying, in the first case, no?
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
...being paid to review is entirely different from being paid to give a positive review. Surely only the second is a bribe, no?
Click to expand...
It depends who is paying, in the first case, no?
Click to expand...

As long as there's no quid pro quo (if the writer is English) or buck pro quo, I don't think it matters.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
...being paid to review is entirely different from being paid to give a positive review. Surely only the second is a bribe, no?
Click to expand...
It depends who is paying, in the first case, no?
Click to expand...

As long as there's no quid pro quo (if the writer is English) or buck pro quo, I don't think it matters.
Click to expand...

Yikes! really? That's an optimistic view of journalistic integrity.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
...being paid to review is entirely different from being paid to give a positive review. Surely only the second is a bribe, no?
Click to expand...
It depends who is paying, in the first case, no?
Click to expand...

As long as there's no quid pro quo (if the writer is English) or buck pro quo, I don't think it matters.
Click to expand...

Logically true, but obviously not pragmatically true. If winery x pays for critic y to travel luxuriously to a luxurious spot at which that winery's wine might be tasted, critic y has at least a conflict of interest. This was one of the bases for Parker's distinguishing himself from prior wine critics in insisting on paying his own way. Bracketing the question of whether he has been true to that principle or not, it remains a valid one and is what conflict of interest is all about.
 
Honestly, this is not a troll thread. On the other hand, Thor and others accepted a Funded Troll Trip (FTT).

This Barbera 7 is a new phenomena. Hard headed bloggers who accept funding to go on a trip where they know they will be panning the wines being shown them.

Furthermore, posting 70 "tasting notes" on the internet about wines that sound horrible is a new type of showmanship.

A simple question: why bother? What purpose does it serve?

Why?

It almost seems bullyish, but finally is just plain boorish.

Go to Italy and find some good wines to recommend. Then, report back here.

Its not hard to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top