Pardon my saying so, but this kind of attitude is every bit as
pretentious as that which some of you seem to be deploring. To suggest
that those who read a magazine are being pretentious, is in and of
itself pretentious.

Personally, I don't buy WS, but do read it on occassion if it's lying
around somewhere. I don't pay for it because I disapprove of it, or
it's readership, but simply because it provides too little value for a
rather hefty price. Pretty simple consumer economics.

But I'm surprised at the negativity towards the magazine here. It may
not represent everyone's feeling towards wine or the wine industry,
but it obvioulsy has appeal to a wide audience - ergo it's circulation
numbers - and from the little of it I have seen, it has some good
content (despite the reliance on reviews). Wasn't it WS that ran some
pointed articles calling out specific wineries for practices in the
winery that created increased incidence of TCA contamination? And I
seem to recall more than one instance of WS being quoted in calling
out CA wineries for pricing practices - and touting lesser knwon
regions for providing better value - a recurring theme amongst many of
us wine geeks.

I'm not advocating for WS - but I think that the "anti WS' attitude,
when taken to such levels of attitude, is in and of itself trendy and
insubstantial.




In article . com>
> wrote:

> Those magazines are for people with more money than sense (you know,
> young urban professionals who want to make an impression in
> society).Makes me want to puke.


--
I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 96 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo