The current debate in the wine blogosphere about the 'old guard vs. new guard' reminds me of the time when U.S. colleges started teaching material written by someone other than 'the dead white male' group.
The traditionalists insisted that the new material was second rate and simply being foisted upon them in an effort towards 'political correctness'.
The group in favor for diversity said these works were just as worthy but had been overlooked due to a culturally ingrained racism and misogyny.
In both circumstances, there are undoubtedly good works from each group.
It doesn't have to be one or the other, but it is time to share the stage.
Both wine and higher education have definitely been affected by a changing user demographic. Once more women and people of color were attending colleges, they eventually demanded to read and study works that were reflective of their own interests and experiences.
Same goes with wine consumption, and therefore the demographic that reads wine reviews, magazine and blogs.
Wine aficionados were once an overwhelmingly older white male group.
Now women buy more wine than men and wine lovers come from all races and backgrounds.
But the younger generation of wine lovers, despite gender or race, are far more likely to read their wine information online than in a print magazine. This is their primary medium for gathering information.
So far the online wine community is far more diverse and reflective of today's wine drinkers.
It seems both sides want the other to be more like them.
The print journalists bemoan the lack of experience and 'seriousness' of the wine bloggers.
The wine bloggers cry foul at the paternalistic 'old boys' network feel of print journalism, with visions of Robert Parker and James Laube deciding wine scores over a round of golf.
But it seems to me that we should take a page from both books.
Maybe the story we write with it will be better than we expect.