Showing posts with label Jim Conaway. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jim Conaway. Show all posts

Monday, July 21, 2014

A Rant and a Solution for the Wine Bloggers Writing Workshop


I attended the Sunday Writing Workshop at #WBC14 led by Mike Dunne, Jim Conaway and Steve Heimoff, the same guys who were on the Saturday Wine Writer panel I wrote about here. The Sunday workshop had problems in my opinion, so I’d like to offer a solution on how to fix it for future conferences.

Oh, and I’m going to rant a bit too, so read on.

The conference agenda described the Sunday workshop as follows:  “… a two-hour workshop on Sunday that will help wine bloggers with their tone and writing.

The general advice given by the panel was sound—use proper grammar, check your spelling, gain command of comma usage, and if possible, get someone to edit your work.*  Yet when they got down to the actual critiques, it felt like the panel was scrambling to organize their thoughts on the fly and did not read the submissions completely. I’ve heard and read comments that many people in the workshop felt bewildered by the critiques. The panelists mainly evaluated the work for print publication, not the blog medium. (Which may have been the directions they were given. I don’t know.) But not all wine bloggers aspire to be print journalists. And once the panel discussed the economic reality of working as a wine writer, I doubt any will pursue full-time print writing at all.

For one submission, about winemakers in Istira, Mike Dunne advised the writer to avoid using weak descriptive language, but then he suggested the entire piece be re-written to focus on the use of Acacia barrels in the region. Yes, that would be lovely, but it was a profile piece on the winemaker, not the barrel program. How helpful was that to the writer seeking help improving a profile piece?

Next, Steve Heimoff commented on my wine tourism piece about DeLoach Vineyards and cautioned us not to “get spun” by our subjects. And then he added pointedly—“ Jean-Charles Boisset is not your friend. He does not care about you.”

What?

I was not even in Steve’s group, I was in Jim’s group. Later, via some back and forth on twitter, Steve said there is a fine line between advertorial and editorial and that my piece read like a paid PR vehicle. I can assure you I was not paid by DeLoach.

Steve Heimoff (shown right) with Mr. JCB, his friend, not mine apparently.

A journalist from the Press Democrat attended the DeLoach event and filed a story that was almost identical to mine in terms of content and facts, yet the tone was impersonal and detached. (As a  journalistic piece should be.)  My blog post covered the same facts but was imbued with my personality and experience. That's what blogs do! Enthusiasm and humor does not make it an advertorial.

You can compare and contrast for yourself. Here are links to both:
Press Democrat—DeLoach
Come For the Wine—DeLoach

I think perhaps Steve failed to consider who my audience is and may not comprehend that my readers understand my tongue-in-cheek sense of humor. I took his advertorial remark as that of the pot calling the kettle black given his new Wine Marketing Communications role at Kendall Jackson. Or maybe he secretly covets my plucky marketing acumen. (I’ll admit you can take the girl out of marketing, but you can’t take the marketing out of the girl.) But I know the difference between writing for an audience and selling to an audience.

The truth is, I actually do admire Jean-Charles Boisset and I think his efforts to create interesting, fun, and educational experiences for visitors to his wineries presents a model of wine tourism. My goal is to encourage travel to wine regions. People who read the DeLoach piece said it peaked their interest to visit. Thus, mission accomplished.

And for the record, I don’t have anything against Steve. We are quite similar really. I like hats and dogs and wine too. And unlike some bloggers ( see #7)* -- I don't think his is a doddering, out of touch, grandpa. Heck, we may be the same age for all I know. (Just don’t call my blog advertorial, Gramps!)
*Well, anotherwineblog.com in link above only said -- "grand-fatherly” -- not doddering and out of touch, those are my words.

End of rant.

Now, on to my suggestion for improving the workshop.

SOLUTION--

I think it was difficult for the panel to read so many posts and try to offer something concrete for each participant. Workshop was the wrong word to describe what the session delivered.

If WBC wants to offer this type of session again, I think the format needs to be recast as a PAID one-day pre-conference workshop and taught by a qualified writing instructor.

Workshop discussion topics could include:
*Framing a story
*Crafting a lede
*How to decide which form is best for your story
*Creating a compelling story arc
*How to write vivid prose and avoid clichés
*How to pitch stories
*How to work with editors
*How writing for the web differs from writing for print!!! -- Because it does! {Unicorns be damned}

The workshop should also include in-class writing exercises.

So what should something like this cost? I’d say around $200-$300 per person. This amount would be a massive bargain compared to fees for similar one-day writing workshops and help ensure the chosen instructor is compensated and worthy. No qualified writer would or should ever do this kind of thing for free.

Marcy & Steve on the advertorial/editorial slide.
--It’s a slippery slope.

By the way, the day you can't rant on your blog is the day the Internet ends.

* WARNING: this blog may contain typos, grammatical errors, and egregious misuse of commas.

Related Post: Impressions on the Wine Writers Panel at #WBC14 Buellton and My Hunch About Jim Conaway’s Next Book

Saturday, July 19, 2014

Impressions on the Wine Writers Panel at #WBC14 Buellton and My Hunch About Jim Conaway’s Next Book


A few blog posts have already been written about the Saturday Wine Writers Panel at the 2014 Wine Bloggers Conference in Buellton last weekend, (here is a good one) -- but I thought I’d give my impressions too.

The Saturday panel with wine writers Jim Conaway, Mike Dunne, and Steve Heimoff, was in my view, an example of people who are more comfortable on the page than in person. Many great writers are not great speakers. In fact some are completely inarticulate off the page. So while there were a few nuggets of gold in the session, the panning it took to get them was painful.

I found the panel tedious, but in fairness, these types of Q &A panels are always difficult to pull off and it’s hard to get the speakers to be concise and succinct. My hat is off to Taylor Eason for doing a great job wrangling the panel into some semblance of order. Cheers to that!

Mike Dunne, a writer for the Sacramento Bee, seemed overshadowed by the other panelists long rambles. His comments about his writing process were straight forward, but nothing truly noteworthy.

Steve Heimoff is well known as Steve Heimoff. The best question for Heimoff was  –“How do you manage conflicts of interest between your PR obligations with Kendall Jackson vs. your personal blog?”

Steve squirmed a bit and said “Oh wow, that’s a good question.” Then he went on to say that there were some pressures and issues regarding his blog while at Wine Enthusiast, but part of his deal at KJ was that his blog was off the negotiating table. It’s his opinion and he can write what he wants. So in essence he is corporate flack by day, intrepid wine blogger by night! Nice work if you can get it. I dare say he knows how to juggle his editorial with his advertorial. Amirite?

Jim Conaway gave the keynote in Penticton at WBC13 and I thought it was very good. I read both of Jim’s books on Napa and enjoyed them very much. I would have liked to hear more about Jim’s writing and interview process. His Napa books reminded me of Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, the non-fiction work by John Berendt.

These kinds of books take a tremendous amount of research and trust creation with your subject. It’s embedded journalism. I imagine Jim’s bourbon and charm offensive is very effective for disarming the people he writes about. Smile before you betray their trust! According to Jim, the diligent and patient writer will find a way to put their subject at ease and eventually the interviewee’s vanity will get in the way and they’ll open up to you. You just need to cozy up to your subject, drink their wine, eat their food, and then get them comfy enough to drop their guard and tell you some real dirt that you can write-up.

In the long run I think it’s probably difficult to repeat the process. You become a victim of your own success and word will spread that you are not to be trusted. That’s the mistake people make in the first place; they talk to writers freely -- but a writer must never be trusted.

I wonder if Jim’s foray into fiction with Nose has anything to do with running out of people who will talk to him? I hope not, because I think his non-fiction is far superior to his fiction.

Given that Jim came back for more WBC this year, I can’t help but wonder if he is working on a deep dark expose of the world of wine blogging. God knows he could write a dozy of a book on the topic.

So, fellow bloggers, did you find yourself getting chatted up by Jim at any of the after-after parties? Do tell.

RELATED POST: A Rant and a Solution for the #WBC14 Writing Workshop

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...