Look Out Paso Town

By the time you're reading this, I'll already be on a jet plane, Paso Robles bound for a whirlwind three-day press junket. Yep, you read me right: a press junket. This is treading new ground for me. Not just the trip — I've never been to Paso (don't know if anyone calls it that but I've decided to) — but especially the idea of accepting an expenses paid, tourism-board-sponsored visit.

The offers have been coming fast and furious (at least relative to a previously absolute dearth...), this one landing hard on the heels of the invitation I was unable to accept to attend the Barbera 2010 meeting in Asti. The ringleader of that trip, Jeremy Parzen, along with my fellow band of brother (and sister) bloggers faced similar concerns when deciding to undertake that trip as I do now. And it all comes at a time when the s**t is apparently flying fast and furious around the Internet and Blogosphere regarding questions about the merits of wine blogs, the seeming futility of writing them, and the worthiness and credibility of their authors.

At least as much if not more so than my friend Jeremy, I've been trying to keep my nose above those waters, to avoid getting sucked into the fray. Instead, I'm just going to keep doing what I've been doing. Enjoying wine, eating food, drinking an occasional beer, traveling, riding my bike, listening to tunes, working an honest day job in the wine biz and — when the mood strikes and I have something to say — writing about it all. Unlike fellow wine writers on the payroll of "brick and mortar" publishing houses, magazines, newspapers, etc., I'm not accountable to any editorial board or corporate parent. But I do hold myself accountable. Accountable to me. Myself. I. And you. And I can say with my head held high and an unflinching stare that that's enough for me. I hope you feel the same.

I'm going on the trip to see what there is to see, to find what there is to learn. I know there will be some destinations that I may not have normally chosen to visit, a winery or two that might veer more toward the market-driven norms than I'm usually prone to seeking out. I'm looking at that as a good thing, an opportunity to push my own envelope. If you only ever look at one side of a coin, you'll never know what's on the other... and that's no way to live a life.

Obviously, the Paso Robles Wine Country Alliance (sponsors of the trip) and the various wineries, restaurants and farms we'll visit are hoping I'll write about them. Obviously, I most likely will. But like my other Asti-trippin' friend Cory, whose coverage of Barbera 2010 was not only extremely well done but also highly personal and sometimes stridently opinionated, I'll write only when I have something personally meaningful to say.

I'm looking forward to the trip and hope you'll look forward to reading about the experiences that come of it.

* * *

Oh yeah, when this was all bouncing around in my head, along came a tune that wouldn't let go. Just replace "Jackson" with "Paso" and you'll hear it too.

Intro only...

The Ethics of Sampling

One evening earlier this week, I Twittered about as much as I ever have in a single session: three or four times in fairly rapid succession, my regular pattern being more along the lines of three messages per week. What drew me into such garrulousness was an ongoing discussion of blogging ethics. The finer point in question was whether or not a wine blogger (or any person in the wine writing trade, I suppose) who accepts press samples is obliged to publish a review of every wine received. At least one person thought yes, others thought no, and I found myself siding with the latter camp.

I’ve never gotten around to publishing a “policies” page here at MFWT, so let me clear up any questions you may have. I do accept samples for review. I also promise to taste everything sent my way with as open and critical a mind as possible. And I’m happy to provide feedback, as Lenn suggested, in the form of a raw tasting note to anyone who sends me a sample. I can’t promise I’ll get to every bottle immediately, so if you’re looking for instant review gratification, I may not be your man. But again, I do promise to get to each and every bottle in due course. When I do blog about a wine I’ve received as a sample, I’ll always state that it was a sample and let you know who sent it my way.

In any case, and more importantly, I’ll blog about the wine only if I find something compelling to say about it, only if its context and quality – good or bad – move me enough to make me want to write about and share my experience. It’s as simple as that.

Or is it?

What happens when a sample comes from someone you know, even from someone you consider a friend? In such cases, I think there’s a natural human reflex to soften one’s step, to be kinder, gentler or – in a negative scenario – silent.

I also think it’s important, no matter how difficult, not to let those reflexes sway you.

I found myself in just such a situation recently when Terence Hughes, the man behind Mondosapore and co-proprietor of Domenico Selections, sent me a box full of wines for review. It’s not as if Terry and I are best buddies or lifelong chums. I’ve only actually met the guy once…. But between that, the occasional email correspondence and following each others blogs for the last couple of years, I have come to count him as a friend.

As I’ve already written up one of the wines he sent me, it should be obvious that I've already worked my way through this ethical pickle. And I’d like to think I reviewed the wine just as honestly and bluntly as I would one I’d purchased or one I’d received from a more anonymous sample sender. I don’t think Mr. Hughes would have wanted it any other way.

With one of the other wines he sent, though, I found myself holding back, writing less quickly than I might have otherwise. That may have been influenced by the fact that Terry smartly sent two bottles of each wine. I knew I’d be able to give the wine another look, get to know it better before putting pen to paper, fingers to keys and posting to the blogosphere.

Does that make me hypocritical or unethical? That’s for you to decide, I suppose, though I’d like to think it just means I’m careful and considered in my work here at MFWT.

Or do you think this is all just a long winded prelude to and softener of a harsh review? For answer to that question you’ll have to wait until tomorrow, as I do think it would be unfair to bury a review – good or bad – at the end of this pseudo-dialectic discourse.

Intro only...