Wine site Palate Press says wine writer Natalie Maclean "appears to be building her reputation, and her business, on the work of others". In this latest piece she is accused of reproducing other writers' reviews without properly attributing them. Secondly, commenters below the line also accuse her of charging winemakers a fee if they want her to review their wines.
I'm not commenting on the specifics of the Natalie Maclean
case, but in general terms the first point seems pretty clear – it's a given
that if you quote from someone else's work, at the very least you properly cite
the source. News organisations do this all the time – newspapers report a story
or quote that was previously an 'exclusive' in another paper – and they cite
(or should do) the original paper somewhere in their article ('…the Sun reported').
So that's it. Attribute sources properly. Even better, make your own content
where you can.
But point 2) raises some more interesting stuff, some grey
areas. Average readers might rightly be shocked by the thought of a writer
asking for a fee to review someone's wine. But how widespread is this? How many
other wine writers have taken something in exchange – not necessarily cash,
maybe a gift or hospitality or whatever – in return for running a review?
Writing as a profession has to be commercially viable. How
you make it so is the challenge.
Well respected wine awards might choose to charge fees for
people to submit their wines. Publications (not just wine) might give more
editorial space to advertisers. Wine writers might be paid by retailers to
write for their magazines or appear in their marketing brochures (incidentally
the pressure to do this might grow as writers try to make a living while
readers increasingly expect not to pay for content).
Wine writers often have their travel to vineyards paid for
by someone. That someone, maybe a winemaker/region/PR, is doing so in the
knowledge they'll get much sought-after editorial space in exchange. They're
not doing it for the greater good.
Which of the above points are ethically sound or not? And for example with the last point about travel to vineyards etc, what's the best alternative? Writers paying their own way for
all their samples and travel? Then who's going to be able to afford to be a wine
writer? There's a serious point behind all those red-trouser jokes after all –
the wine industry might be more accessible than it once was, but it still
comes across as about as diverse as the current cabinet.
This raises the kind of issues freelance journalist George
Monbiot talks about here, in his decision to disclose all of his payments
throughout the year.
