Enthusiastically Born Again
Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 5:19AM 
Not so long ago I railed against The Wine Enthusiast for being a boring copy of The Wine Spectator. Not that the writing was exactly the same, but because the format was a duplicate - down to the embarrassing black tie wine orgies of those with more bucks than knowledge, palate or taste, but possessed with a perfect memory for points. So I ignored The Wine Enthusiast for years, after all, what was the point of reading a bad copy of The Wine Spectator.
Recently several things have made me reexamine my prejudice against The Wine Enthusiast, some of which were driven by self-interest, but most were inspired by my admiration for their efforts. Mainly there is the bravado and talent of the Wine Enthusiast’s West Coast Editor Steve Heimhoff, who has argued his positions with intelligence, passion and consideration for the opinions of others, on his own blog, on Twitter and on other social network outlets. While there are many print journalists who try, Heimhoff has engaged the online community with energy, honesty and mutual respect and is now reaping the rewards of his integrity with mainstream exposure and expanded respect.
For whatever reason, The Wine Enthusiast has discovered its reason for being. I don’t know when or why it happened, but I’m very happy that it did.
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (4)
Hi Craig, nice post! I really haven't found a print wine mag to my taste, despite a lot of trying (except the great Wine Business Monthly, tho that's for industry types). When pressed however, I've liked WE over WS, as I feel it has always been more down to earth and I've always liked the fact that it will review a large number of value wines.
I've also been impressed with Steve's ability to embrace Wine 2.0 with a fervor that is unusual, what with his 3 blogs and still acting in his W. Coast Editor position at WE.
Thanks for the post!
When I first read Wine Enthusiast I was mildly amused that the format was so similar to Wine Spectator. But I loved the mag. The critic's palette is very close to mine (as opposed to WS), I enjoy the well-written articles and have found their list to be helpful. Like you, I'm put-off by the "swells" pictures. Someone bought it for me as a gift and I let the subscription expire; now someone else has gifted me the WS. I tried to enjoy WS, but it now goes straight into the recycling. One exception, I read this month's Napa Valley guide before I threw it away. I like James Loube and his introduction to the piece, but the featured wineries, lodging and restaurants weren't my style. WS has nothing to offer this Girl.
I was disappointed to read GirlwithaGlass's dismissive comments about Wine Spectator on Craig's blog. And a bit confused -- she said the wineries we listed in our June 15 issue (travel to Napa) "weren't her style,", yet we praised Hess Winery as a great place to visit -- and so has she in a recent blog entry.
I believe there is room in the wine world for many voices, just as there are many wines. There's no need to disrespect one voice (or wine) just because you may prefer another. I doubt there's another source of wine information as comprehensive or up-to-date or impassioned as Wine Spectator. I hope GirlwithaGlass, and others who care about wine, will continue to read us, as we read them.
Thomas Matthews
Executive editor
Wine Spectator
Thomas, thank you for taking the time to respond to my post. I agree with you, my comments came off as dismissive and please accept my apologies. I wasn't at my best when I wrote that!
There is plenty of room for all kinds of tastes. It seems to me that WS is targeted to collectors, socialites and folks looking for cult wines--which isn't my profile.
Btw, Hess does stand out among the larger wineries. I wrote about why on my blog.
Thanks again for responding. I look forward to crossing paths one day and raising a glass with you.