Every review on robertparker.com has the reviewer’s name, it’s been that way for years. The front page of the website lists authors’ names 21 times and only mentions Robert Parker without website title “Robert Parker Wine Advocate” once, for his bio. To suggest that the writers aren’t getting credit for their work is not correct. No one’s being misled here except people pretending to be. Robert Parker is the most famous name in wine who doesn’t make wine. He’s a brand and it makes good business sense for somebody to make commercial use of that brand. If people don’t like that or don’t like the reviewers or the reviews, they can exercise their right to not pay for the service.
The original post was about retailers presenting current scores as being from RP himself. That’s on the retailer and buyer beware would seem obvious.
I think it’s a bit much to ask the WA to police the use of their scores in advertising.
Exactly.
And as Chris pointed out, its use by the WA itself does a disservice to the current writers.
As to this:
Robert Parker is the most famous name in wine who doesn’t make wine. He’s a brand and it makes good business sense for somebody to make commercial use of that brand.
Maybe.
That was the case in years past. But ask wine drinkers in their 20s who Robert Parker is and likely as not they won’t know. Even during his heyday many casual wine drinkers had no idea who he was. It’s a brand of decreasing value as his participation is increasingly in the past, and for the people with whom his name does resonate, using it is counter-productive.
The people who subscribe to the publication understand that he’s not writing all the notes (unless they’re illiterate). As far as the people who rely on shelf talkers, I think that’s its own reward but I also doubt the majority of them care, they just want some guidance and I doubt they’ve done any careful analysis about sources.
So, we seem to be left with a subset of the people who understand but claim to be worried about protecting the interests of a proposed great silent majority of consumers who likely would not think they need protection.
-Al
That’s a good point. How many people who rely on a point score on a shelf distinguish between WA, WS and WE, or WA RP and WA LBP?
That’s an interesting perspective. I guess we could extend it to any number of areas where knowing actual facts is unimportant to forming an opinion or making a choice.
Absolutely.
Al is totally on point.
Hell, I’m planning to vote next year and I sure as hell don’t want my decision misguided by facts!
Or points.
Didn’t the reviews used to show the initials of the reviewer after the text, especially when it was Parker. I seem to remember seeing RP after reviews or when they weren’t done by Parker himself it was just WA? Now it seems like from the OP that they want the best of both worlds RPWA?
This is business as usual. Build a brand, make it significant and sell it for good money.
I was just hoping to get any willing feedback in this thread as I think their contributions to it would be met with furthering the conversation, that’s all. Not looking for any direct answer, I was just really enjoying the insight here, and since I know they come on here, I thought it was worth mentioning.
I started with Zachys in January of this year.
No one has claimed that the reviews are misleading as to who reviewed. It’s the advertising that doesn’t reveal the actual reviewer.
I don’t know about shelf talkers.
Ha, yes, exactly Al.
If people care more they will investigate further and learn the difference between WS, WA, WE, JD, AG. Retailers are going to do what they can to sell their product, that may include a mix of the reviewer scores to show good scores to influence people. No different from Road and Track or Car and Driver Car of the Year. I wouldn’t buy a car based on that award but there are probably people who would be swayed by that. I would read reviews in those publications to help me pick a car. Luckily we can go test drive a car but some of us can’t go taste every wine so reviews can be helpful, even the scores.
I meant the retailers use as you say. Wasn’t tying to say that the publication was misleading.
What about Rick Steves? You think he’s writing all those guidebooks (actually a recent profile in the NYT seems to indicate he’s way more involved that you might think) but between the volume of books, TV shows, and other engagements there’s no way he’s not relying on assistants.
And I just found out that Christian Dior has been dead 60 years and hasn’t actually been designing all my expensive designer handbags!
That’s OK because when I go in the store the shelf talkers make it clear who the designer really was tho
Dick Clark’s New Year’s Rockin’ Eve. Hasn’t he been dead for over 7 years now? And to this day the show still carries his name as if he still has something to do with it.
Cliff Hillegass sold his company in 1998 and passed away in 2001.
CliffsNotes continues to sell millions of copies of recently written books every year.
Jimmy Dean doesn’t make Jimmy Dean sausage any more. Get over it.
But his voice still advertises on TV! First time I heard that recently it was kind of spooky…
It’s actually a bit deceptive. Anyone under the age of about 40 has probably never heard of Jimmy Dean, now they hear a live voice advertising a product. Gotta be confusing.