August 18, 2009 1:20:39 PM EST
It's great to see so many people stand up in of support BoozeMonkey, and kudos to Mr Keys for entering the monkey's den to address his critics personally. While there will remain differences in opinion, the obvious passion with which individuals have expressed themselves bodes well (in an its own modest way) for the Australian wine industry.
Blogging has obviously thrived over recent years leading to a degree of democratisation of journalism which should be lauded (here's looking at you Mr Murdock). But I suppose Mr Keys' issue is: where is the authority and accountability if everyone is a reporter? He can claim authority based on his track record and the reputation he has acquired, which is fair enough.
Personally, I know my opinions don't carry nearly as much weight as his and, like many Monkeys here, I am but a jpeg with a bunch of posts. But because the BoozeMonkey forum allows free and instant opinion, anyone can disagree with me and offer alternative perspectives– all of which is open to the public. I believe the sum of these public debates does carry weight. Mr Keys would be right to infer that one opinion by one anonymous poster lacks authority. But if you throw in a few opinions from unrelated sources then I think you have something of significance.
As a small business owner I would be a fool to assume that one good review from a punter makes my wine a great one. But several good reviews and I think I should be quite pleased. Equally, if I get several bad reviews, I need to look again at what I'm brewing in the shed. When, on the other hand, I've had a good review from a critic/wine show there seems to be only a vague correlation with the punter's choice. Confusing? You bet.
So for me, frustration is at least one reason I am embracing BoozeMonkey. The Australian wine industry is big, and it is exceedingly hard for small players to get heard or even taking seriously. With BoozeMonkey, every voice gets heard.