On the heels of the 1st Annual American Wine Blog Awards, a watershed moment if there’s ever been one for Wine blogs, I read a blurb from writer Tina Caputo in the February issue of Wines & Wines magazine.
In her monthly column of quick hits called Wise & Otherwise, she posits:
I understand the value of a good blog (especially one that’s not afraid to tell it like it is). What I don’t understand is why professional writers need to have them, too. It’s not enough for wine columnists to voice their views in print once a month, or in a weekly newspaper; now they also have to reveal their secret, inner thoughts and feelings in a daily blogs. What can these people say in a blog that they can’t write in their regular print outlets? I’ll tell you what: mundane details about what they ate for dinner last night and the bottle of wine they opened. Yawn. I’m not blaming the writers for this blogging bombardment—I suspect the must-blog decree is passed down to them from their editors and publishers. —Everybody has a blog! The kids are going crazy for them!”—If it’s not worth including in your weekly or monthly columns, chances are, it’s not worth writing about. By the way, I enjoyed a delicious linguine last night with braised veal and a glass of tasty Nero d’Avola.
Interesting perspective, misguided perhaps. I shouldn’t be surprised that she holds this position; the magazine she writes for doesn’t provide email addresses for their writers, instead referring all inquiries for all writers to the generic email address of .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). One of the key tenets of blogging is transparency and context—the pen may be mightier than the sword, but in blogging there is never a question of ethics (or shouldn’t be) because motivations are exposed and context is provided.
As Tim from Winecast.net so eloquently points out in the previous post, Web 2.0 and Wine, the point with blogs is to engage in a two-way conversation. And while I’m holding strong to my belief that print media isn’t going away anytime soon, what I do agree with is precisely what Tina Caputo gets wrong. A blog by a professional writer allows that writer to actually engage with their audience as opposed to a one way communication. It can also be an outlet to do investigative types of things that wouldn’t normally be a part of an editorial mission. Mark at Uncorked, a writer for the Dayton Daily News, is the master of this approach providing real ancillary value to his print readers.
In another scenario, a blog could be used to provide additional context.
Lenn from Lenndevours has an interesting string of posts dating back to early January that pointedly questioned a New York Times Op-Ed piece written by Lisa Granik that was critical of the New York’s Long Island wine industry.
Essentially what happened is the author of the NYT’s piece, given a large platform, said the Long Island wine business is an ugly baby—she pointed out what she felt were misguided perceptions about the wine, varietals planted, and questionable choices in pricing—basically everything across the board.
Lenn from Lenndevours, a rational advocate for the wines of New York, wrote a response to the Op-Ed piece that refuted, delicately, much of what the she wrote. Interestingly, Lenn was also able to unearth an article that Granik wrote for another publication that took an entirely different and positive slant on the industry and indicates, at the least, a forked tongue in written form, especially given that the two pieces by the same author were written within 12 the same months. Lenn’s readers also weighed in with numerous opinions and first hand accounts of the error in perspective or judgment from the author, Granik—including one who pointed out that her full-time profession is for a New York wine distributor, which might skew her judgment.
And, as a third aspect of this scenario, Jeff Miller, a writer for the Long Island Business Times, wrote an analysis of the two pieces between Lenn and his readers and the Lisa Granik piece. Interestingly, the Long Island Business Times writer never sought direct quotes from Lenn or those that commented on Lenn’s piece, he quoted directly from Lenn’s web site, though siding, generally, with those that defended the Long Island wine industry.
So, coming full circle, back to Tina Caputo’s comments about what purpose a professional writer’s blog serves. In this entire conversation between Lenn and his readers and the Business Times, the one thing not addressed has been a response from Granik on why or where she was coming from when she wrote a damning piece without much credible evidence to back-up her opinions. If she had a blog, she could engage in a meaningful conversation with her detractors and provide some context to her opinions and why she wrote what she wrote. That’s progress, and that’s what blogging can engender—transparency and ethics.
Tina Caputo might consider doing the same, lest she get caught in the crosshairs of providing an opinion without much support or dubious context.
Oh, and as a side note, in an Editorial footnote appended on February 11, 2007 to the original Op-Ed piece dated January 7th, the New York Time notes:
Editors’ Note: February 11, 2007, Sunday An Op-Ed article on Jan. 7, about Long Island wines, should have mentioned that the writer, Lisa Granik, works for a wine wholesaler that distributes wines from Long Island and other regions.
Undoubtedly, that footnote and correction would not have occurred without Lenndevours analysis of this issue.