Political Bias in Wine Is Not Helpful, But It's Unavoidable
We must be honest enough to recognize our bias, including me.
The tension between objectivity and ideology is easily a defining conflict in nearly every realm today. The world of wine is no exception. Nor am I.
To be “ecumenical” about wine—to treat it as a universal, shared human experience transcending borders and beliefs and ideology—requires a deliberate act of detachment that is both difficult today as well as a choice. In a political world, wine is frequently co-opted as a vessel for social and ideological signaling. I’m finding it has become de rigueur to choose ideology over detachment in the wine world, whether deliberately or as the easiest path.
I, too, fall victim to taking the ideological path.
The Ideological Curation of Wine
Ideological curation occurs when wine is no longer judged solely by its profile, merits or interest, but by the “virtue” of its origin. This shift prioritizes one person’s or group’s principles over palate and service. We see it in the Canadian boycott of American wines as a protest over geopolitical policy made in the United States.
In an article by Kathleen Wilcox in Wine-Searcher entitled, Wine Diplomacy Paves the Way, an American wine producer in Paris observes the ideological curation of wine in Europe, “One importer remarked that yes, restaurants in Denmark were taking wines off their lists, but he said that importers [of American wines] were imploring them to let the Danish people make their own decision on whether or not to buy the wine at dinner or not.”
We have seen “Natural Wine” marketed as an alternative or antidote to globalism, followed by wine lists and retail wine curation excluding any wine not considered “natural”.
Whether it is the rigid adherence to “natural” winemaking as a moral and political imperative or the exclusion of certain regions’ wines from a retail shelf based on ideological opposition to a country’s policies, this kind of vinous curation serves as a form of virtue signaling.
By choosing what to drink or to offer drinkers in a public setting based on one’s political alignment or ideology, the consumer or critic or retailer or restauratuer or country isn’t practicing discernment; they are performing an identity. This leads to a form of Paternalism, where self-appointed gatekeepers decide which wines are “righteous” for the public to consume, effectively narrowing the ecumenical scope of wine to a curated list of approved ideologies.
So be it. It’s not as though wine has been uniquely appropriated for the communication of a political philosophy or worldview. And Canada is not the first country to boycott the goods of another over political disagreement. And those who curate offerings of wine have long practiced ideological paternalism over discernment.
But it’s good to be able to see it when it’s done and not ignore it when you are doing it.
Discernment vs. Paternalism in “The Spill”
Each morning when I create THE SPILL for publication, I look over hundreds of wine-related articles, videos, and podcasts. I’m trying to be discerning. I’m trying to curate a collection of the most interesting, highest quality, most useful, and most entertaining consumer wine content just published. For the most part, this is an act of discernment rather than paternalism.
But I recognize that my choices as to what appears in The Spill and what gets delivered to its readers are occasionally an act of ideological curation. I often exclude certain articles from inclusion in The Spill for very personal and political reasons.
This primarily happens when it comes to the intersection of health and alcohol. Every day I look over the list of potential content to include in The Spill Newsletter, I come across one or many articles that explore or try to explain the intersection of alcohol consumption and health. Today, many of those pieces of content purposefully explain that “alcohol causes cancer” or “there is no safe level of alcohol consumption.” I will not include these articles in The Spill. Ever.
I have my reasons for making this choice and performing this act of paternalism. And it is a form of paternalism and not discernment. Many of these articles are very well written. While this kind of high-quality information helps determine if wine content focusing on other subjects makes the cut and gets delivered to The Spill readers, it does not matter when it comes to articles promoting the idea that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption.
This distinction between Discernment and Paternalism deserves a little clarification.
Discernment is an expert’s attempt to filter noise and highlight excellence.
Paternalism is the assumption that the audience requires this filtering because the alternative (letting them read and decide for themselves) leads to the wrong decisions.
Given these definitions, The Spill serves as an example of both editorial discernment and paternalism (when it comes to content on wine and health). It should be said that it’s rare when a retailer’s inventory or a restaurant's wine list or a writer’s list of wines to try is purely an example of paternalism. But it does happen.
Some restaurant wine lists these days won’t include wines from the United States or Israel, or will only consist of Natural Wine, or will feature only wines by female winemakers: Paternalism. And though the quality of a wine list and the experience of the consumer is harmed by this kind of choice, it is fair to say the rest of the list is very likely an act of discernment on the part of the people or person who designed it.
The Practice of Ideological Detachment
As I mentioned above, the choice to ignore ideology and politics and curate a wine collection based on concerns outside these realms is, today, a difficult act of detachment.
To curate wine or wine content today in a politically ecumenical way means purposefully turning away from the philosophical and political “principles” that guide us in determining “good” or “bad”. As the political has risen in the hierarchy of personal identity over the past 20 years, I think it has become more and more difficult for discernment to take precedent over paternalism without a significant internal struggle.
In a world increasingly dominated by political tribalism, the act of being ecumenical about nearly anything, including wine, is a radical one that is made even more difficult by the increased willingness of people to judge others publicly. To take the ecumenical path suggests that wine, like art, should be allowed to exist in a space that is not constantly policed for ideological purity.
While THE SPILL utilizes paternalism to guide its readers away from what I view as damaging propaganda concerning wine and health, its ultimate success depends on whether this curated newsletter has the power to broaden the reader’s horizons rather than reinforce a specific ideological silo. I think the same can be said of those who curate wine lists, wine inventories, and write about wine.
By Tom Wark
Tom Wark is the publisher of Fermentation, a source of commentary on the wine business that he has written since 2004. He is also the publisher of THE SPILL, a free, daily newsletter that curates the best wine content on the web.
There is clearly, clearly a well-funded global power play, likely from communist China and taken up by the routine leftist radical socioeconomic malcontents that never go away... and also "scientists" and credentialled "experts" that get paid to write impressive studies that are really garbage, to destroy all the joy in the lives of people living in democratic capitalist industrial countries. Making alcohol an evil fit right into that larger plan as the consumption of alcohol, except for the abuse of it and all other abuses of consumed substances, creates fantastic joy.
You are right to exclude that propaganda. You would be more right to criticize it.