in response to "when blogs go bad"
I woke up this morning to a DM saying to take a look at Steve Heimoff's latest blog post titled When blogs go bad. Little did I know that this post was on a comment I wrote on one of his other posts Holier than thou? When it comes to pay to play, blogging is looking a lot like print.
Startled and humbled as I was to read my name in his blog, I was also a bit confused at the correlation of my comment and the meat of his blog post. I talked about how this is a new world where everyone has a voice and he choice to write about one specific instance about a blog reciting a press release, a very good point yes. But they seem to be two different thoughts, at least IMHO.
While I am still new to the wine world and corporate America, I have worked with wineries for a few years and loved the marketing industry and diving into consumers psyches for even longer. I have only been a part of the social media aspect of marketing for a little over a year, but so much has changed within that year and brands are just now figuring out that they have to be online. By no means would I ever call myself an expert on anything and my wine blog itself is just me writing about my life in Sonoma County and since wine was/is a huge part of my life, Shana the wine blogger was born. For some reason (I do like to think it is my sense of humor and that I know about all the cool events) people read and even enjoy my blog. I am not a wine critic, though I definitely do have an opinion about everything. My response to Steve's post on my comment is below and I think it is just as valid as my original comment, both points being that there is room for all of us in this crazy online world. This post really got me thinking about the changing environment and the idea that social media (blogging, Twitter, Facebook, ect.) is still in its infancy.
----
As both a PR “flack” and a “wine blogger” who writes simply because I love wine, I agree that there is a difference between rewriting a press release and doing your homework, but press releases has been regurgitated for years. This is not a new phenomenon to the wine blogging world, nor is free gifts to the mommy bloggers.
The news (speaking generally) has always had a bias and used scare tactics or fluff stories for the sake of entertainment. I learned at a young age to take the news with a grain of salt… Same goes with anything I read online through a blog, a tweet, a review on Yelp, or even an article in a magazine.
Granted, I am much younger than you and many of your readers, but the youth are the wine buyers and drinkers of the future and the Internet has allowed us to personalize the way we get information and given us more choices of what we read. And that is the way we like it.
You stated that you were going to explain the difference of good and bad blogs “for some of us.” My case was that for the rest of us, we read what we like. I personally do not like reading a rewritten press release just as much as I dislike reading them as is, but with the adaptation of the social media press release, consumers now have easy access to press releases anyways.
If someone reads a blog post/press release written by a “useful idiot” on Lodi wines and decides to try it based on the blog post, so be it. That is their problem. Hell, people still drink Franzia and swear by it. This does not discredit true wine critics like you, but I think people should be allowed to write their opinions and make up their own minds about what makes a good blog or a bad blog.
I am not sure why you have complex, confused emotions about where the Internet is taking us, but to not think you have to adapt to this new way of communication is absurd (in a later comment I stated I wasn't just talking about him, but talking about the industry as a whole). In your previous post, the wine magazines are not going anywhere and they still can be relevant. I simply think there is room for both.
As you stated in Tom Wark’s post -- "Can't we all just get along?"
10 comments
I think you do a great discredit, to the audience all of us bloggers and wineries are trying to reach. Your point of view assumes that these people are ignorant and will read anything that comes across screen, trusting that is non-biased, accurate information without checking the source. Sure, there is a Woman called Sally, from Houston, who has a blog, called, The Dry Creek Wine Lady. Sally's a stay at home mom, she has never actually been to Dry Creek Valley, and gets all of her news from Fox and Okay Magazine. Not exactly a creditable writer. How loud or how far is her voice heard? Who actually follows her online? You are making huge assumptions about the readers here. Yes, there are novices out there with no creed, but a passion for wine none the less. On the other hand, look at Shana Ray (http://shanaray.com/maybe-you-want-to-know-more/) or Hardy Wallace (http://www.dirtysouthwine.com/) for instance. Both are more than qualified to write about wine. A combination of professional marketing experience, a master sommelier certification, loyal followings of listeners, and most importantly passion for wine - these two bloggers have serious street creed in my opinion. Yet, look at this guy, http://twitter.com/FakeHardy, a twit, dedicated to slamming Hardy. What does this do to us as a creditable news sources for the wine industry? It makes us look like petty little pundits and diminishs our creditability significantly.
Shana does not proclaim to be an expert, and as she states not everyone wants super esoteric tasting notes from an expert? I don’t? I select boggers to follow based on common interest and my personal opinion on of their credibility.
Most of is in blogosphere have an "about" link, a valuable tool to discern weather or not you trust the information of the writer. Take it or leave it from that point. At the Wine Bloggers Conference this weekend, moderator Barry Schuler, opened his lecture by asking us all to raise our hands if we had a day job; 90% of the people in the room raised their hand. Sure there are some blogger out there getting shwag and other perks from wineries but, most of do not make money doing this. We do it out of a passion for wine. Novices and experts alike are entitled to an opinion about wine - we live in a free world after all. There is no doubt that social media has had a profound effect on what we call news and how it is generated. But, the news industry as a whole has been altered dramatically by our economic climate. Social media is morphing change to the publishing world. The Wine industry is smart to embrace this change. Undoubtedly, some of us bloggers will become something similar to a New York Times columnist at some point. There is a space and a need for us. None of us will make it unless we have the right qualifications (Hardy is a case in point). So, for right now let Susie, from Houston, blog her heart away, I don't think her passion for wine is exactly impacting the industry. Those of us, who do have creditable voices and the ability to influence the industry, have a reasonability to keep the conversation about wine and not name calling.
And yes, even a "Fake" Hardy is gonna connect with some people (and perhaps lead them to drink MG wine in the process!).
There is a guy out there, John Corcoran, who writes a well visited blog called "Think Wine Marketing"-- great content but I do not feel connected to him. Does not mean that his writing is NOT good or my perception is BAD... we are just different and don't connect. (Ok, so maybe it is my perception which has turned to vinegar...).
Point is, we have transitioned into the world of "long tails" and there is room for everyone who chooses to jump on the train.
And anyway, Steve is just picking up any old wine related topic to keep the discussions on his blog moving... imagine if he just wrote his notes from the wine tastings on his blog... he would not be able to carry the attention of his readers or better yet to expand his list of readers that way. (Ok, I am speaking again as terribly non-professional blogger and wine consumer, notes mean *nothing* to me.)
Shana will have her loyal readers because they feel connected with her... for whatever reasons they feel connected to her.
Those are my two cents.
(Just a quick clarification. I've gone through ISG level I and II which is a good ways from a Master Sommelier. It is more comparable to a CSW.)
People build a following because others like to listen to them, credibility is subjective. Both influence and both have their place in their wine industry. Simple as that.
"However, what’s surprising, well not surprising perhaps but inducing a significant feeling of disappointment, is the raising tide of ad hominem attacks on the loosely confederated and decentralized wine blogger community from admired members of the traditional wine print media. As Scott Rosenberg writes in ‘say everything‘, a concise history of the blogging phenomena, “saying that ninety percent of blogs are crap‘ is way too close to implying that “ninety percent of people are crap.’ It seems a tad disingenuous to address the tired and the vapid, and then to paint the whole on the failings of the few. S.I Hayakawa must be turning over in his grave."
The whole premise of social media is that when writing and self-publishing on the internet, we are extending our hands out in friendship. Just like in a physical encounter you can choose whether to shake hands or not based on your own criteria. Personally, I like the feed back that I receive from my blog, and it's not been all positive. It seems that Andy has chosen to pull back her hand, and that's OK. Others reach out to shake it, and that's great. But none of us is running for class president at the moment, we just want to, in our own way, move the needle forward.
Oh, Shana, congrats on, what, your second eye of the storm moment. Remember what Dorothy Parker once said: "I don't care what they say about me as long as none of it's true."
Cheers,
Cork
One commenter here writes: "I think you do a great discredit, to the audience all of us bloggers and wineries are trying to reach. Your point of view assumes that these people are ignorant and will read anything that comes across screen, trusting that is non-biased, accurate information without checking the source."
Of course there is group of readers of blogs that will assume the information is accurate. But what's worse, for the wine blogosphere is those people who recognize the information they see is wrong or bogus because it gives all bloggers a bad name. If you think these discerning folks simply won't come back to the bad blog and won't form any opinions of the blogosphere you're just dead wrong. We've watch a couple very visible and very influential folks in the wine business do just that.
