What does it take to get a Wine Spectator Award of Excellence?

I just want to say that this is a phenomenal piece of work. Thanks for thinking this up!

This is fantastic! Esp. the wine list heavy on the “swampy” selection. Now with the Award of Excellence, it sounds like Osteria L’Intrepido is poised for great things.

Dear Mr. Goldstein:

Thank you for doing this! For a long time I have been wondering about these awards, since I have had some pretty disappointing experiences with wine lists all over the country in restaurants I had chosen because of the Award of Excellence.

This was until I came up with a simple calculation for my choice: among the restaurants that have the Award, the more conspicuously it is displayed (website, front door etc.), the higher the chances that the wine list will be mediocre.

Now we have the proof of the pudding thanks to you. Oh, they will be pissed… it was about time.

PS: After reading this I went straight to get the Wine Trials book. Just glanced through but it looks terrific!

Looks like it got pulled from the winespectator.com website already…

Robin, you are a genius.

Last year, I had a meal at Doris and Ed’s Restaurant in New Jersey, a restaurant that proudly displays its WS “Award of Excellence” and one that features a wine list of more than 200 bottles, including some “cult” wines and some limited distribution wines from California. The wine list is heavy on the Chardonnays. I found some wines from small producers in the Santa Barbara Mtns. and wanted some guidance selecting one that paired well with our meal. Our waitress was clueless and, when asked to invite the sommelier to our table, responded that he was busy. Upon further questioning, she informed us that he was enjoying his own dinner in another part of the restaurant.
A somewhat less clueless server was of little help and, ultimately, we decided to stick with a familiar white from Burgundy. We were then told that was sold out, but was offered the same wine from a different vintage. We agreed and asked that the wine be brought out immediately, as our appetizers were already being served.
After several more requests, a less-than-chilled bottle of our requested wine was brought to our table. No adjustment was made in the price of the bottle for our hardship.
After this experience, I wrote to Wine Spectator, criticizing their award to this restaurant and received a reply explaining how the Award works.
The bottom line here is caveat emptor. Any restaurant can get the award for $250 and a wine list. There is absolutely no guarantee of quality, let alone excellence, in this award.

Holy….

…..CRAP!

If WS cannot answer this acceptably as being a one-off issue, then they have a serious, serious problem on their hands!

Well it goes to show that paper always has been patient. We should never forget that WS is a for profit publication which already has made and broken a many of wineries or restaurants with their god-like approach. Any other decent publication would fire their editor over an incident like this. What happened to journalistic integrity?
It now begs the question: Since they are not checking the credentials of restaurants, are they tasting all the wines they write about, or all the cigars they rate in Cigar Aficionado? Marvin: you too have the face the music one day. Porco miseria!

And we were so excited to have the Rational Denial Lab’s Christmas Party at Osteria L’Intrepido. I guess we’ll have to cancel our reservation and find another venue…

Hopefully this hilarious effort will have a secondary benefit of silencing the critics of 100pt scoring systems. Turns out they are good for something: Fooling Wine Spectator!

What does it take to get a Wine Spectator Award of Excellence? Er eh $250 with a good cover letter, and wine list.

for Tim at comment number 18, this isn’t their first snafu. I alluded to it at the vinography post on this piece of heaven, but you can also see it here: http://wineforall.com/rants.html#sidesplitting – another piece of greatness from our buddy Tish!

@Steve (#20): “Basically, if you meet the criteria for submission you will get one.”

I would suggest that if this were the “Wine Spectator Seal of Approval,” tacitly grouping it with all the other seals of approval that mostly meant “they gave us money to give us this,” there would be much less of a vague sense of betrayal. The word “excellence” and, even more so, “award” have specific meanings that taken together connote, how can I put this, an award based on excellence. Even if it’s the “lowest of the awards out there,” one should reasonably expect that, based on its name, it is in fact an award. If they drop one word or the other — “Seal of Excellence,” perhaps, or say, “Award for Giving Wine Spectator $250” — I think that should solve the problem nicely, don’t you?

This was just an all out fraud. Fabricated web site, phone number (with answering machine), and customer testimonials. The wine list was also actually very good, with most wines scoring over 80 points and many over 90 (on a 100 point scale). You didn’t prove anything bad about that wine magazine, you just proved you have a knack for fraud. Good job!

http://forums.winespectator.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6826053161/m/835102245

Why don’t you post the WS response? It only seems fair to let them tell their side of the story. What a joke you are, not only do you have to lie to WS, you also have to lie to us in order to make your story more believable. You are a moron-

I have alays simply referred to that issue as “The Yellow {ages”.
Pay for your listing! No one takes that seriously.
Very funny expose, guy.
Thanks!

You think that the Wine Spectator Award is a bloated piece of paper
then go further and nominate your research for a James Beard Award.
The some holds. All you have to do for a Wine Spectator award is pay the dues and submit the menus by the dead line date. For a James Beard all you have to do is register as a member and then nominate your writings.
The business is rife with confidence schemes and publicist dreams, and it all boils down to the dollar, or lira in this case. Publicists convince the unwitting restaurateur that they cannot exist without the publicist, same as the ego starved “wine director” that needs that Wine Spectator Award,
same as the same chefs and food critics get nominated over and over for James Beard Awards, ego. Go figure, with all the chefs, writers, journals, papers and bartenders at large that the same two dozen regularly rank across the boards. It ain’t because they’re all that great. There are thousands of great chefs in this country. Money. Money talks.

way to go. you must bring down the evil empire! seriously, are you going to publish this or submit this to any media outlets? alice feiring will dig it – should email her.

That, and you don’t mention the other 230+ wines on your list that scored above 80 pts. You’re a douche.

Nor does Wine Spectator show this list.

Sorry my English is not very good. I try hard to read the magazine. Then I reach disappointment. You see, I read “award” “excellence” and I think wow, there is something there that I should see. But you mean, there actually is nothing? Which is fine I think. But when I look at the magazine answer to this, I see they make excuses. And that makes me doubt everything the magazine says.

It is sad for the Wine Spectator. Someone can come up please with better content and less commercial reasons for existing.

#30 Joe, #35 Arthur, #39 John:

The original post states very clearly that “the main wine list that I submitted was a perfectly decent selection from around Italy meeting the magazine’s numerical criteria” and that the wines listed here are the reserve wine list.

The magazine’s defense amounts to: “It seemed to exist although we never laid eyes on it.”

Let’s see how the court of public opinion rules on this one…

Dear Robin Goldstein,

I, like so many bloggers and forum-rats out there, took your story at face value upon reading it. I’m ashamed to admit I didn’t read it too closely – so ready was I to condemn WS.

Thomas Matthews publicly responded, giving details which reveal that you did not simply submit a menu, cover-letter, and wine list. Instead you went to great lengths to legitimize the restaurant, and it is not immediately clear that WS was at fault for buying into your hoax. One immediate effect is that WS may have to raise their operation costs to include detailed background checks to stop such fraud in the future – good job!

You did allow that your main list was “perfectly decent”, but from WS’s comments it appears that the list was excellently comprehensive, and contained only 5 sub-80 point wines (though the reserve list was almost all sub-80.

While this might be an oversight on the WS’s part, it was by no means as “easy” to get the award as you implied.

What puzzles me is why you would go to such lengths. Surely you must have known the complete truth wouldn’t be as flattering as your abridged version! Surely you must have realized that WS would tell the whole truth. Yes, you succeeded in drumming up publicity for your book, which will probably make you more money. On the other hand, I’m inclined to read your book for the sheer pleasure of ripping apart shoddy journalism.

And at the end of the day, what have you contributed to the Wine World?

-Rajiv

I invite you to my home in Italy for a dinner…..

Great job. no further comment.

bravo

stefano

I bow to you Mrs. Goldstein.

What puzzles me most then everything is: how is it possible to give “awards” without tasting, in this case food???????????
Is it based on what? On the most sophisticated dish name?

I am not at all surprised from Wine Spectators. It is another example that shows It in it’s true colors:
just a big money machine.

Thank you indeed Mrs. Goldstein.

That said..the fact remains, WS didn’t have any way (nor more importantly, any process) to physically check to see if the restaurant actually existed. This confirms their true hybrid status as a for profit entertainment publication in which the role of editor and publisher is shared by the same person. They are not, and have never been, a member of the fourth estate.

I have been in the Wine World for 30 years and have known Thomas Mathews as a true gentleman.He brought polish to what was a very unrefined magazine .At the beginning Marvin Shanken was very miserly in allowing Mathews to build a magazine to its current level.In many ways today it competes quit well against the Advocate.In no way do I believe they are mistake proof we have seen that New York Times and Washington post have been deceived.Robert Parker has many notorious change of minds most famously on the 1983 Burgundy’s .In many ways this altered his course and made him persona non grata in burgundy for years. I think you were involved in a deception to garner attention for yourself.This always sends me back to advice I give to wine lovers if you can’t taste it yourself chat with someone you trust who has.Thats why a good Wine Consultant or Sommelier is worth there weight in gold.One who can tailor to your preferences.PHA

Complimenti a wine spectator, sono proprio dei truffatori ..e noi dei polli

I knew these wine snobs were frauds because I found many of their highly scored wines just acceptable. You need to connect your discovery with the fraud at wine stores, where Wine Spectactor ratings are posted along with the bottles of wine, and priced accordingly.

Nedo (#67)

According to the WS, efforts WERE made to locate the restaurant and to contact its staff by telephone.

the ‘awards’ are based on the wine lists, not ambience, food etc. for those you need to go to Michelin or Zagat.

No contention on my part that the word ‘award’ is misleading, but that does not absolve Robin Goldstein of his intentions in carrying out what looks, sounds and smells like a hatchet job.

Why not spell things out in an intelligent essay on his own website? The information is readily available here:

http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Dining/Restaurant_Awards/Rest_Awards_Info/0,2839,RAP,00.html

and here:

http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Dining/Restaurant_Awards/Rest_Awards_Info/0,2839,NEGl,00.html

Agree with Dan on that one…the charade has been exposed…it will be interesting to see how the trade will react…especially those that have actively marketed their “award of excellence” and particularly when consumers come in–armed-with the knowledge that it’s nothing more than pay for play.

GOOD JOBS………IN VINO VERITAS

@Anonimo: because Wine Spectator is an english magazine and probably this news had more visibility in foreign newspapers.

Arthur,

I echo chocolate_tort in answer to your question. The charade to me is not how easily you can receive the award, but that a publication that presents itself as a bastion of lifestyle journalism does do one basic fact check! (albeit for a specious “award”) That to me speaks volumes about all of the “information” they present in their pages, and the quality and care they take in researching…also, interesting to note that so far this thread has been more negative than positive…appparently the WS brand advocates are not weighing in or quietly acknowledging the oxymoronic situation.

nice work!! i heard about you just now and i got to ws site before this.. they still try to exit as “in truth” from this situation.. very good work..

Oh very good !

Dear Robin, your job has been great…..absolutely. As italian, i an very surprised that no italians take care about this kind of comments in a foreign magazine. Luckily, there is someone like you: you did a very great job and i believe this is a real piece of real journalism.

To Anonimo: impara l’inglese, quando hai tempo, cosi puoi fare qualche commento intelligente anche tu senza sentirti escluso

great work! I heard it yesterday at Italian news

Congratulations on a great piece of research but I am not entirely surprised. Near my home there is a small shopping center which had a pizza parlor. One day, they started to offer a more extensive dinner menu. In fact to get to the restaurant seating area, you had to walk through the pizza take out area. I never ate anything but pizza there because I didn’t see how they could get very far beyond their pizza skills. Not much later they posted a large sign that said they won a Wine Spectator Award of Excellence. I couldn’t and didn’t believe it. I just didn’t know how they could win such an award. I think it fooled a bunch of people though. Thanks for revealing the true value of the WS award.

As the owner of a very well-known wine bar (before wine bars were everywhere), I stopped submitting our list to the “Wine Speculator” after they started charging a fee to win an award. It was a money-grubbing scam then and it is one now. Almost everyone who submits “wins”. Bravo to you for finally exposing them for the weasels they are!

Robin,
I’ll make a post in my blog Midnight Martini (about eat, food and dance in São Paulo – Brazil) about this historical hoax and, of course, I will make reference to WS defense (although I believe they are defenseless).
Regards,
Regis

If this “award” (and I have said multiple times, that this program should have a different name and give out marks of merit named something else than “awards”) is paid advertising, should not there be different fees for being considered for each of the tiers? There are three (increasing) levels to the “award” but as far as I can tell, there is only ONE consideration fee.
I think the lines are lot fuzzier than people would like and there is more gray than black or white.

STILL WAITING FOR THE COMPLETE WINE LIST.

“That said..the fact remains, WS didn’t have any way (nor more importantly, any process) to physically check to see if the restaurant actually existed.”…..

Then why rate it?

Chef’s Professional Agency, you must be talking about Yelp, I’ve heard it first hand from a restaurant owner who had a negative review removed.

It is only fitting that an academic restate the obvious. I remember a marketing study that affirmed the hypothesis that shoppers prefer buying clothing that fits as opposed to clothing that does not fit …… DUH

So, it shouldn’t come as any real insight that the WS does not actually follow-up on what they are provided with as long as the $250 cheque is attached.

Next off will be a study that affirms that the wines and wineries that advertise in the WS have higher scores than the ones that don’t — DUH

Great job Goldstein. You have exposed a fraud. How on earth can they expect to be taken seriously when now the whole word knows that they don’t even bother to check the restaurant they are awarding the prize to?

Dear Robin,
you have absolutely won me over! I have myself been accused of cooking up controversy in my own own country due to my writing with my gloves off…my recent post cites your brave and succesful experiment as well.
i would like to associate (and cross-link web addresses to begin with), if that sounds feasible and to your interest.
inspired by your fearlesslness,
just,
magan.

Great. Anyone who pays $250 and sends a wine list gets an award of exellence. This is pure genius. Way to go Wine Spectator. 3 feet down…

It just goes to show you how this magazine does business. It’s all pay for placement and ratings. Ever wonder why the magazine’s advertisers get the highest ratings?

In your statement above, you clearly underplay the extent to which your “scientific research” was an elaborate sting operation: if you’d just submitted a list and they had rubber stamped it, that would be one thing. But putting up a web site, plugging in an answering machine and getting fake reviews posted at Chowhound? That is actively scamming.

Should Wine Spectator be more careful? They should certainly have asked for someone to return their calls to certify that the restaurant was actually in existence. But I’d call that a mistake based on good faith, rather than total lack of verification.

I take awards lists with a big grain of salt. But obviously, we should take whatever you are writing with at least as big a grain of salt.

You’ve done what all of us who have spent 250 bucks for a piece paper already knew–we paid 250 bucks for a piece of paper. The world is shocked.
If your goal is to expose WS–get on the editorial staff of that stinking mag and tell us what really goes on (as if we didn’t already know).
Thanks to you, my meaningless piece of paper is equally meaningless to my valued patrons. I suppose I’m better for the revelation, even though my submissions have heretofore been honest, opptimistic and an expression of our approach to food and wine. Thank you for exposing me for the shallow entreprenuer that I am. Robin is a genius.

Now you know why we in the distribution and on-premise specialties call it ‘The Wine Speculator’…
pathetic….

Trackback in URL…

John, come on. Granted, Social Text and their pomo courtiers reacted to Alan Sokal like a whiny bunch of little babies, but I didn’t see them threatening to sue Sokal. Nor did PublishAmerica threaten to sue the group that wrote Atlanta Nights. You know why? Because they were caught red-handed and really didn’t have any defense, just bluster and obvious lies.

No, Wine Spectator took it on the chin for having low standards, and deservedly so. If the wine community wasn’t dominated by refugees from The Emperor’s New Clothes, this would be a major blow to their credibility.

fantastic !!!!

Frankly, anyone who is silly enough to let another person tell them what they will enjoy drinking is fair game to be fooled.

Mr Goldstein,

You have carried on the great tradition of muckrakers from years past. This is exactly the type of journalism we need in the age of compressed sound bytes and a reticence or fear to ask questions, real questions, of institutions and the powers that be.

I salute you, Sir, and offer a toast of the best Baby Duck I can find (hey, it all tastes good, right?)

Cheers,

LG

From Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Great job!! Another example of the power of markenting and the lack of serious people in the world of “critics” specially in the wine world. Wine Spectator sucks, more than ever!!

Seriously, I need reservations for next Friday around 8. Can you squeeze me in?

Why not just open the next one for Burgundy, “Restaurante du Merde”?

Nice work…

Estimado Señor Goldstein,

Sin duda es un insulto a todos los amantes del vino, pero sobre todo a la opinión especializada; no puede ser posible llegar al punto de materializar lo poco que queda de dignidad. Es una verdadera verguenza, nuestra obligación es informar y contribuir a fomentar cultura, no ha destruirla.

En nombre del mundo que ama ésta bebida de dioses, le damos las gracias.

No olvidemos que el mejor vino es que el que te gusta, no importa que tan sofisticado sea tu paladar, lo importante es el respeto a tus gustos; cierto y claro de que hay calidad de calidades, pero no estoy de acuerdo en desmerecer el trabajo y sacrificio de quienes estan en la industria del vino y por una cuestion de marketing, compromisos o influencias poner sin ningun tipo de respeto numeros a algo que realmente desconocemos.

Un abrazo.

Nice post. I’m sure there is more info on my-pig.com

Brilliant, Brililiant, Brilliant…..JUST BRILLIANT!

– Semie Lee
Professional Wine Packaging

Looks like this person has plenty of free time…funny but useless
Agree.

Hello webmaster. Not totally agree with you, but you just gave me an idea for a new eBook regarding \”What does it take to get a Wine Spectator Award of Excellence?\”. It is related to baby chocolate cigars. Thanks.

Wine Spectator
They actually state clearly that they watch the wines. It is not necessary to taste the wines. Wine TASTER would imply a sipping of each entry. A restaurant guide from the Wine Spectator would provide an aesthetic perspective, eg. furniture, linens, and quality at a quick glance.

There should be a whistle-blower award for lies in journalistic reporting, named after Robin Goldstein. This evening, I shall raise an extra toast to Mr. Goldstein with a glass of my $10 Chardonnay.

I can’t believe the Wine Speculator is doing that! Charging a fee for an award? That’s ridiculous! Thanks for exposing the truth.