The Wine Advocate’s Spanish Problem

A pretty big story broke last week in the world of wine. But you wouldn’t know about unless you read wine blogs.

On November 30, Jim Budd published a story on his wine blog Jim’s Loire. In it he includes emails that suggest that Pancho Campo, a well connected wine professional in Spain, was charging fees to steer American wine critic Jay Miller to vineyards and producers willing to pay him hefty fees.

Jay Miller is the critic responsible for Spain at the Wine Advocate, the hugely influential publication founded by Robert Parker. Jay Miller has subsequently left the Wine Advocate. Robert Parker and Jay Miller say his departure was previously planned. Wine blogger W. Blake Gray writes about the questions still left unanswered.

Beyond what exactly Campo did, and what Jay Miller knew or should have known, two things really bother me. One is the lack of any coverage in the mainstream press. A story about the business of wine might not appeal to everyone. But you’d think some outlet could take the time to report on this, considering the huge economic influence the Wine Advocate and its rating system — “90 Points from Parker!” – exerts on the market.

Second, Parker’s response to Jim Budd was reprehensible. Parker blustered and threatened legal action, referring to Budd as “this blogger” and talking about “potential lawsuits.” This from the man who many years ago was a blogger himself, before there was such a thing.

Parker left a comfortable government lawyer job in the late 70s to launch a tiny newsletter because he loved wine, and hated many things about wine business. He then grew to be the most important man in the industry. He needs to be a bigger man than his response indicates, and save his anger for Campo bringing disrepute on the business and reputation Parker has built.

A few years I read an excellent book on Parker by Elin McCoy, The Emperor of Wine. It was a fascinating read and seemed like a balanced portrait. Here’s a passage that seems illustrative in this case:

“And what to make of Parker the man? He is warm and caring, loyal to a fault, slow to recognize perfidy in others, but also quick to attribute dubious motives to those who don’t agree with him and sometimes vindictive if you cross him. Are these sunspots? Mere motes that are outshone by the remarkable professionalism and hard work he’s brought to his role — not to mention his generosity to friends, employees, and dedication to his readers?

Or are they the result of stubbornness, self-righteousness and a lack of self-doubt? Parker’s all-too-human faults have been unduly magnified by his colossal success. Many other wine critics, had they been given a fraction of his awesome power, would have become monsters, their egos impossible to tether.”

UPDATE: Parker has launched his own legal investigation — see article here from Decanter. Thanks to Stephen Hyde for sharing via a comment to this post.

UPDATE 2: Here’s Decanter with the results of the investigation by Philadelphia law firm Cozen O’Connor. They find Jay Miller had no knowledge of and received no payoffs, recommend The Wine Advocate sever ties with Campo, publish no Miller reviews after June 2011, and confirmed most of what Jim Budd reported last year.