Today, we start the first of three questions that will become our round table discussions at the conference. Our motivation for having the questions laid out ahead of time is that it gives us ample opportunity to discuss and debate them before we actually meet. In this way, we can begin the conference hashing out the tough questions, rather than wasting our time at square one.
Therefore, we truly hope that you all take the time to share your ideas about these questions both here on the EWBC and our forum. More importantly, we hope that you take these topics and discuss them with your readers, so that we might learn not only from each other’s opinions, but also from our readers who eventually, will be influenced by our ideas.
Are wine ratings a positive addition to the wine conversation, or are they outdated, requiring us to discuss what our future looks like without them?
30+ years ago, Robert Parker first began to rate wines on a 100pt scale. Some mark that point as the beginning of the end. Others laud the fact that now wines are ranked, ordered, sorted and categorized. Some regions rely so heavily on ratings that they themselves are afraid to price their wines before they know the rating they have “earned”. In a world where the web allows us to communicate in new and dynamic ways, do we really need these ratings anymore?
Or maybe we just need them to come in a different form such as 5 grapes, 3 hearts, 100 points, letter grades or thumbs up or down? What do you think? Is there still a place for ratings, or does focusing on how we can communicate about wine in this new world of the internet allow us to see beyond the points?
What systems do you use? Do you feel that wine bloggers have to rate wine in order to be considered professional? Can wine be evaluated without a quantitative mark laid upon it? Can wine bloggers, as we gain more influence, begin to impact the effect of ratings in the wine world as a whole?
We want to know what you think! Tell us your thoughts here in the comments or in the forum