‘Expert’ wine reviews are often paid for. So should you trust them?
- Written by Paul Chad, Lecturer, Faculty of Business and Law, School of Business, University of Wollongong, University of Wollongong
Wine is the most popular[1] alcoholic drink in Australia. We have more than 2,100 local wineries[2], as well as copious amounts of imported wines. With so much to choose from – and prices ranging from less than $5 to more than $1,000 – even wine aficionados can sometimes struggle to pick a bottle.
Is a $1,000 bottle of wine 200 times “better” than a $5 bottle? Ultimately, our enjoyment of wine is based on our personal taste (literally). But unless you have the opportunity to taste before you buy, you have to look for other quality cues.
A consumer making a wine purchase may consider a number of factors such as brand reputation, reviews/ratings (including recommendations from friends), taste (such as grape variety, flavour and sweetness preference), occasion, price, and the appeal of the label, packaging or name.
Alongside this, wineries and liquor retailers also proactively market their wines by displaying high scores from wine reviews and wine show results. But how valuable are these reviews and results, really?
The (many) ways of reviewing wine
First, what qualifies someone to be a wine reviewer? Although there are no specific qualifications, reviewers will typically have extensive training and experience in wine appreciation and/or winemaking.
Importantly, wine is generally rated based on its quality relative to other wines of the same grape variety and growing region. This means it is problematic to directly compare ratings across different wine varieties and regions.
Robert Parker, one of the world’s top wine critics, developed a 100-point rating system[3] for wine. While variants exist, the 100-point scale typically starts at 50, with points awarded for colour (5 points max), aroma/bouquet (15 points), flavour/finish (20 points) and overall quality (10 points).
In Australia, James Halliday is a legend of the wine industry and founder of the Halliday Wine Companion, which provides tasting notes, ratings based on Halliday’s own version of the 100-point system[4], winery ratings[5] and annual awards[6].
Similarly, the internationally acclaimed Huon Hooke and Bob Campbell (one of few to hold the[7] prestigious Master of Wine qualification) provide The Real Review[8], which offers wine reviews, ratings, an annual “top wineries[9]” ranking and a “wine classification[10]” system for Australian and New Zealand wines.
Wineries can submit wines to Wine Companion and The Real Review to be reviewed for free. However, the wineries don’t automatically own these reviews, and any subsequent usage by wineries of those reviews for marketing requires a Wine Companion[11] or The Real Review[12] winery membership.
Another Australian-based wine reviewing organisation is Wine Pilot, founded by Angus Hughson. Wine Pilot charges[13] $70 (plus GST) for an individual review, after which the winery can use the review for marketing for free. Similarly, Sam Kim’s New Zealand-based Wine Orbit charges $30 per bottle[14] to review Australian wine, after which the review can be used for marketing.
There are differing views[15] as to whether an upfront fee for a wine review is appropriate – as well as how this compares to offering free reviews and then subsequently charging wineries annual memberships for their use.
So, are wine reviews ‘independent’?
This is a question readers will need to judge for themselves.
Stories abound regarding the independence of reviewers and whether they have a vested financial interest in giving high reviews. If a reviewer gives a winery poor reviews, that winery may no longer come to them (and no longer pay them). At the same time the reviewer has their own integrity to consider.
The Conversation reached out to Sam Kim, who said his $30 flat fee helped in running his small business – and that doing the work for free simply wasn’t viable.
As to whether this affected his impartiality, he said: “I would like to say ‘no’, but it’s not up to me to judge. Consumers will ultimately decide that. And given I have been around a while, perhaps I’m doing okay much of the time.”
Wine Pilot’s Angus Hughson said there was “potential for a number of factors to influence reviews by wine communicators”, including close personal relationships developed with wine makers as a result of their work.
He said wine reviewing ultimately comes down to personal integrity, and that writers who inflated scores to be more widely quoted and/or recognised risked damaging their brand, thereby “eroding their influence in the long term.”
Halliday Managing Director Jacinta Hardie-Grant said Wine Companion’s subscription model for marketing did not influence the impartiality of reviews and that the various tasters do not know whether the winery behind a tasting submission has a subscription or not.
The Real Review did not respond before deadline.
Not an exact science
Let’s now consider wine shows and awards. There are some prestigious wine shows such as the London-based Decanter Awards[16], as well as various smaller shows.
Show operators typically charge wineries to enter their wines, so you really do “have to be in it to win it”. Some wineries choose not to enter, while others are renowned for repeat entries.
But there is a potential problem with the wine show process. Ideally, a rigid, scientific method would be used to determine the winners – but this is not always possible, or indeed practical.
Wine is judged “blind”, whereby judges are unaware of the brand. This is a positive. However, the judges will typically judge numerous wines, so the order of judging can affect the results, which is a negative.
Wine show results and awards also often compare across wine varieties and regions, or have a “Winery of the Year” award. These results and awards have their own sets of judging criteria and are often viewed with a level of scepticism[17].
Consumers should remember these results and awards, while they do have some science behind them[18], are subjective.
Trust your taste buds
Wine reviewers regularly release results of their wine review activities. My inbox subsequently gets bombarded by wineries promoting their winning wines, referring to reviews and award results.
But these reviews and results remain subjective. Just because one person likes a wine, that doesn’t mean someone else (you) will definitely like it!
Try before you buy is the ideal. On this front, your best options are to attend tastings offered at wine shops, visit winery cellar-doors, or buy wines by the glass at restaurants.
The next time you buy a bottle, you may still wish to refer to the reviews or award labels – but don’t break your bank over them.
References
- ^ most popular (www.roymorgan.com)
- ^ 2,100 local wineries (www.wineaustralia.com)
- ^ rating system (www.robertparker.com)
- ^ 100-point system (www.winecompanion.com.au)
- ^ winery ratings (www.winecompanion.com.au)
- ^ annual awards (www.winecompanion.com.au)
- ^ to hold the (www.mastersofwine.org)
- ^ The Real Review (www.therealreview.com)
- ^ top wineries (www.therealreview.com)
- ^ wine classification (www.therealreview.com)
- ^ Wine Companion (www.winecompanion.com.au)
- ^ The Real Review (help.therealreview.com)
- ^ charges (ejournals.vintagejournal.co)
- ^ $30 per bottle (www.wineorbit.co.nz)
- ^ differing views (fermentationwineblog.com)
- ^ Decanter Awards (enter.decanter.com)
- ^ scepticism (wordonthegrapevine.co.uk)
- ^ science behind them (www.theguardian.com)
Read more https://theconversation.com/expert-wine-reviews-are-often-paid-for-so-should-you-trust-them-237224
