Why do newspapers treat wine like poor cousin?


By Andrew Barrow
Spittoon

newspapers
What is it with the weekend papers? More specifically the magazine lifestyle sections with coverage of restaurants, interiors, design, food and wine.

I am sure this is not just a UK-focused problem but one replicated across the English speaking world. Why is it that these magazines seem fine to review a restaurant with the final bill coming in at 60 (US$110) per head, but the wine column on the same page is suggesting 3.99 or 4.99 (sub US$10) wines?

I have just been flicking through an old copy of the Sunday Times Style section before consigning it to the recycle bin. It recommends a beauty cream that retails for 56 a tub and an eye-shadow at 15 (US$27). Further on there is a chair at 2,233 (US$4,100)! A clock for 191 (US$350). An expresso maker for 70 (US$130). A fork for 14 (US$25). The list goes on. Why is it that the wine review section doesn’t replicate such “aspiration products” but sticks resolutely to a branded wine with a quid knocked off (now 3.99 from Sainsbury’s)?

The restaurant bill includes a Dover Sole for 30 (US$55) and a roast pear for 10.50 (US$20). If the wine section was taken as the ’standard’ for cost issues, the review would be of a Tesco Finest ready meal at 4.99 or an IKEA chair at 20.

The restaurant review did mention that the prices were “ridiculously overpriced,” which brings me to another point. Restaurant reviews are often “bad.” I think I am correct in saying one influential critic in New York can cause a restaurant to close with just one bad review. You never hear of a winemaker being sacked when Jancis Robinson slates the wine, do you?

In fact I don’t think I have ever read a poor wine review. They are always positive. Perhaps the limited copy space for the humble wine writer restricts them to writing up the good stuff.

Why are wine and wine critics dealt with so differently from other critics in newspapers?

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.


Other Posts
Gewrztraminer hits just the right notes
50 in 50 #1: Massachusetts — Westport Rivers Winery

Reader Comments

Hmmm…I’d never really picked up on that little dichotomy before. Great points. I’d only point out that the $15 retail wine is going to be at least double that in a restaurant, so that may account for some of the price issue.

You’re absolutely right, though, and here’s my beef: Why is that wine writing focuses (to a fault) on widely available, branded products, when food writers have no qualms about dashing off a recipe with esoteric ingredients I’ll never be able to find? Very strange, indeed.

Andrew: As one of those “old media” newspaper wine writers since 1989, I can tell you that writing for a general-circulation audience (as newspapers do) is tricky business indeed. Whenever I strongly recommend a $20 wine in my newspaper column, the wine shops in my area will sell a few extra bottles. When I strongly recommend a $6 wine, it flies off the shelves. Still, your points, and Trish’s, are well taken. We’ve got to do a better job of finding that middle ground and pleasing — well — everyone.

At the Washington Post, the wine critic in the Food section seems to strike a nice balance among different price ranges. Most weeks, he reviews wines in the $20-30 range. Sometimes he’ll review a few $40-50 wines. Then, other weeks, he’ll give a nod to the students and interns in DC that want to drink wine instead of Budweiser, which means he reviews sub-$15 wines. At the same time, the food critic will write about Citronelle, as well as a local burger joint where you can get a great burger for $2. It’s all about balance.