home : wine recommendations : wine girl for hire : bio : articles : contact

Pontet-Canet and Wine Spectator
March 12, 2008

I'm about to hit the sack but had a moment of journalistic scratch the head and ponder....but..but...when are wine journalists going to measure up to real journalists?

We're all fallible. And, in this case I would guess it was an editorial decision, because, how else could Jo Cooke, write a story about the commitment of Pontet-Cantet to make ‘better wine’ and NOT mention Michel Rolland is the consultant?

This is like saying Spitzer was gunning for prostitution but not mentioning he visits them.

That aside, and I do try to keep real politics out of this blog. Really I do. If Spitzer had been nailed, I'd have rather it was for taking handouts from Southern.


Comments

The thing is . . . "they don't have to..." . . . and what I find it funny is people always try to find a "villian" irrespective of the to concentrate about the wine and the Chateau's commitment itself, not the consultant . . .

It's like I mention that "Pavie Macquin" strives to make a better wine without referring to Derenoncourt as a consultant . . .

Or, it's like I mention that "Meo Camuzet" strives to make a better wine without referring to Henri Jayer as a consultant (during 1989-1990) . . .

I do not want to defend anyone, but, gimme a break, what's wrong with that? ? ? ? ? ? ?

LGR on March 17, 2008 03:27 PM
Post a comment