For The Love Of Port

Wine & Spirits Daily



August 21, 2008

Wine Spectator: Unfairly Duped?

Earlier this week it was revealed that a fake restaurant was awarded Wine Spectator Award of Excellence. Since then, forums, blogs and industry publications have been blowing up with opinions over the issue.

Dr. Vino's wine blog first covered the story on Tuesday with the opening words: "If you decided to get a Wine Spectator Award of Excellence for you restaurant wine list, what would you need? The answer according to Robin Goldstein is $250 and Microsoft Word. Restaurant not actually required."

Goldstein, the author of The Wine Trials, stated on his website that he created a fake restaurant and submitted an application for the award as research for an academic paper. He named the restaurant "Osteria L'Intrepido," which means "Fearless Critic," submitted the application fee ($250), a cover letter, a copy of the restaurant's menu, which he deems "a fun amalgamation of somewhat bumbling nouvelle-Italian recipes," and a wine list. The so-called restaurant claimed to be in Milan.

As it turns out, the "reserve wine list" largely contained some of the lowest-scoring Italian wines in Wine Spectator over the past few decades, says Goldstein. You can view the wine list on his website, with scores and some excerpts from the Wine Spectator reviews.

Needless to say, Osteria L'Intrepido won the Award of Excellence, as published in print in the August 2008 issue of Wine Spectator.

"It's troubling, of course, that a restaurant that doesn't exist could win an Award of Excellence. But it's also troubling that the award doesn't seem to be particularly tied to the quality of the supposed restaurant's 'reserve wine list,' even by Wine Spectator's own standards," stated Goldstein.

He presented his findings at the annual meeting of the American Association of Wine Economists in Portland over the weekend. According to Wines & Vines, Goldstein's presentation focused on "whether or not wine value correlates with consumer appreciation of a wine's intrinsic qualities (not necessarily, he found)." Instead, Goldstein says high wine ratings and premium prices do not necessarily mean that a consumer will appreciate the wine any more that if it was bought at a lower price.

WINE SPECTATOR RESPONDS. Thomas Matthews, executive editor of Wine Spectator, posted a bulletin regarding the sting yesterday on the magazine's online forum.

"Wine Spectator learned yesterday that, for the first time in the 27-year history of our Restaurant Awards program, a fictitious restaurant has entered its wine list for judging," it begins.

Matthews stated that since the story has been picked up in the blogosphere, WS "would like to set forth the actual facts of the matter."

In summary, he says the Awards program never claimed to review the restaurant as a whole. Instead, it has evaluated the content, accuracy and presentation of restaurant wine lists since its inception in 1981.

"We do not claim to visit every restaurant in our Awards program. We do promise to evaluate their wine lists fairly," he stated.

"We assume that if we receive a wine list, the restaurant that created it does in fact exist. In the application, the restaurant owner warrants that all statements and information provided are truthful and accurate. Of course, we make significant efforts to verify the facts."

Matthews said WS called Osteria L'Intrepido several times. Each time it reached an answering machine and a message from a person claiming to be from the restaurant who said it was closed at the moment. When they googled the fake restaurant, it turned up an actual address and location on a map of Milan. Even more elaborately, fictitious diners discussed their experiences at the non-existent restaurant on Chowhound, dating January 2008 to August 2008.

But how could such a poor wine list win an award? Matthews says Goldstein exaggerated on his website, which claims the fake wine list contained "some of the lowest-scoring Italian wines in Wine Spectator over the past few decades." Instead, Matthews says only 15 wines out of the total 256 wines on the list scored below 80 points from Wine Spectator in the past.

"This act of malicious duplicity reminds us that no one is completely immune to fraud. It is sad that an unscrupulous person can attack a publication that has earned its reputation for integrity over the past 32 years. Wine Spectator will clearly have to be more vigilant in the future," Matthews stated.

"Most importantly, however, this scam does not tarnish the legitimate accomplishments of the thousands of real restaurants who currently hold Wine Spectator awards, a result of their skill, hard work and passion for wine."

Of course many in the industry are elated over the bad press for Wine Spectator, while others are defending the popular magazine. If you'd like to get in on the action, check our Dr. Vino's blog, Goldstein's website and the Wine Spectator's forum.

DRINKING AGE UNDER FIRE

The drinking age debate has received loads of press - everyone from WSJ to Fox News - this week sparked by a group of 100 university presidents that call themselves the "Amethyst Initiative." The presidents signed a petition to encourage open discourse on the minimum drinking age of 21, which has resulted in heated debate on all sides.

Even 60 Minutes is said to be preparing a show on the subject. This could end up being another "French Paradox," where 60 Minutes sparked the wine industry by being the first national program to point out alcohol's positive health effects in moderation.

Of course, MADD is staunchly against the initiative and seems entirely closed to even debating the drinking age. One of their biggest defenses is that drunk driving deaths have been reduced since the National Minimum Drinking Age Act was put into effect. However, they do not take into account that the alcohol beverage industry stepped up campaigns against drunk driving around the same time.

We believe the drinking age requirement at least deserves some dispassionate debate and research among policy makers. Whether it's the right decision or not, the issue shouldn't be squashed without giving it the attention it deserves. As our sister publication Beer Business Daily stated: "But for crying out loud, if 100 college presidents - who know college students more than anybody and who have a vested interest in their well-being - think it should be looked at, why wouldn't everybody support that? Just study it."

I saw an article about this in The Times and wondered if it would come up here. What struck me the most was the complete pointlessness of this Award. Does anyone choose their restaurants based on whether they have this award or not? I wonder if any manage to recoup their $250 entrance fee in increased profits?

More seriously, whilst its not unreasonable for the magazine to assume a restaurant actually exists, it is somewhat damning that they don’t seem to be checking that the Wine List actually exists. What is to stop a restaurateur sending in an enhanced wine-list with, say, a few extra first-growth clarets and some more vintage champagne, which he or she doesn’t actually stock to win the award? It could even go on the website for a weeks with some sort of excuse (“we just won another place’s cellar at auction and it hasn’t yet arrived”) for any customers who query it.

I don't think they were unfairly duped at all. It doesn't appear to me that the sting operation went to extraordinary lengths to pull this off, so to me it speaks volumes about Wine Spectator's procedures. They don't appear to have put much effort into verifying the restaurant even existed, let alone verifying the restaurant's wine list.

Seriously... they tried to call 3 times and every time they were told that the restaurant was closed at the moment? I'm sorry, but that should set off an alarm and put the review on hold until such time as the restaurant is actually open.

Wine Spectator's argument that only 15 of the 256 wines on the list scored lower than 80 points also strikes me as desperate. I realize that an 80-point wine is supposed to be a good wine on the 100-point scale, but it's not excellent. I also realize that a restaurant needs to include 80-point wines on its list in order to keep at least part of the list accessible to people on a budget. But their argument that only 15 were below 80 sounds hollow... how many rated 80-85 vs how many rated 90-95? I would think that the wine list at an excellent restaurant woudn't contain any wines rated below 80. Or is my expectation unreasonable?

I believe this was very unfair to the Wine Spectator. I don't want to look like I'm an advocate for them, but it appears to me, this "sting" was very elaborate and very unfair. You might not like them, but I believe their restaurant wine program can only help wine service in restaurants which is dismal to begin with. To me, this hurts the world of wine; much more than Spectator ever did.

i think they got what they deserve. I mean, come on, they give awards to restaurants they've NEVER been to. That to me is a bit misleading for most of the uninformed public. For what, $250, a restaurant can get an "award" from WS and then use that as promotion. I've heard of a fair amount of people that have used WS awards to find places to eat.

I am of the opinion that any organization giving an award should at least VISIT the place, at least once, to check it out. This "sting" made it very apparant that any decent wine list submited and payment of the fee would get an award of some sort. And yes, most of the wine list was decent with 90+ point wines on it.

Glenn is right, you call a restarant 3 times and only get an answering machine....hmm, I may not be a rocket scientist but that would send up major red flags to me! And it goes to show, the internet is only ONE tool and that tool is not necessarily accurate. Any half literate computer user can make up a nice looking website in a few hours.Irregardless, WS dropped the ball and got snowballed...doesn't make them look too good in my eyes.

I don't think this hurt anyone Eric, OK except WS, and I don't see how giving an award that a restuarant pays for helps to makes their dismal wines service better. This actually will force WS to be much more diligent in future years, which is a good thing.

Dorene (my wife) and I were roaming around the dark back alleys of Porto on a Sunday night in search of any open restaurant. Those of you who have roamed Porto on a Sunday after 6 p.m. know the difficulty in finding anything open that still is serving food. So we went way off the tourist trail (June 2003) and what most Americans would probably be afraid of ... tiny dark alleys ... far from the beaten path, at about 9:00 at night. An hour into this adventure we came across a small shop and the ONLY thing that identified it as an eatery, was a Wine Spectator award in a tiny display window with a curtain on it that prevented you from seeing in. My wife just happened to notice the award because there was a light on inside. Had she not pointed it out, I would have missed it.

I knocked on the door, a man comes and opens it and ushers us in. I explain in pigeon Portuguese that we are hoping to find a place to eat. He realized I was an American and started to speak English and was very nice to us. It was now 10 p.m. He sat us at a table and called his wife from the back. She came out in chef whites and introduced herself. We sat there for a seven-course four hour dinner (there was no menu or wine list ... she just cooks what was fresh in the market and he served the wine), that was one of the greatest and most unforgettable meals I've ever eaten anywhere. With each course, Antonio poured a different wine for us. This was serious ultra-gourmet food presented in the most unique way. At the end of our meal and Port, it was 2 a.m., Antonio asked where we were staying. He insisted on driving us back to our hotel.

Two years later, Mario and I took our first FTLOP Port Harvest Tour participants to the restaurant and our guests were absolutely blown away by the quality of the food, which was a mixture of French style and Portuguese ingredients using very exotic accoutrements to display each dish. I can't think of any other meal that has come close to being that unique. If it was not for that WS Award in the window, my wife never would have stumbled onto Mariazinha, which very sadly is no longer open (although there is a different restaurant in another venue with the same name ... but nowhere near as good, nor the same owners).

That is my WS Award story and why I never make fun of that award anymore.

Another quickie: back in 2000-2001 the company I worked for in addition to the Italian restaurant chain that I was associated with (Cucina! Cucina!) had a 3 unit group of Daniel's Broiler steak restaurants. They had excellent wine cellars there and the likes of Bill Gates and members of the Seattle football, baseball and basketball teams were in there often. The owner wanted a WS Grand Award and had me and one of their Sommeliers work on upgrading the list to then submit to WS. I had created many wine lists over the years, for individual restaurants, chains, hotels, golf resorts and even a group of casinos. So this was going to be a real fun job with no limit to our budget in exploring what to include on the list. In fact, I have an article coming out in two months in Sommelier Journal (an industry wine magazine) on this very topic.