Authority in wine and cultural responsibility: a reflection on the role of influential figures in wine

By Pier Giulio Alessandro Bendinelli

In the world of wine, authority is an immensely powerful form of symbolic capital. It is not specifically a matter of technical expertise alone or of a prestigious professional career (or one recognized as such); it is a matter of perceived credibility, a tangible influence on purchasing decisions, and the ability to shape collective taste.

When a recognized figure—through qualifications, experience, or media visibility—expresses a public opinion about a wine, that opinion is never neutral. It affects how consumers interpret the very concept of quality. It helps define what constitutes a “serious wine,” what constitutes a “sound wine,” and what deserves to be purchased from an online wine shop or included on a wine list.

For this reason, the issue of sponsorships in wine cannot be dismissed as a simple market dynamic and, above all—even legally—cannot be presented as a mere recommendation, a suggestion linked not to genuine preferences but to payments or benefits, more or less direct.

This is where the decisive point lies.

A recommendation presupposes independent judgment.

A promotion presupposes an economic relationship.

The two can coexist, but they must be clearly distinguishable. When a recommendation is perceived by the public as a free expression of taste and expertise, but in reality arises from a commercial agreement, we are no longer dealing with a technical opinion: we are dealing with promotional communication.

And promotional communication is legitimate, provided it is recognizable as such.

The problem is not the existence of compensation. The problem is ambiguity.

The boundary between legitimate promotion and cultural legitimization

It is clear that wine is also an industry, and that promotion is part of the economic system. Commercial collaborations are not, in themselves, objectionable. The problem arises when the boundary between promotion and cultural legitimization becomes blurred.

If a figure perceived as a qualitative reference publicly endorses products conceived primarily to be competitive within a price range—sound wines, perhaps enjoyable, but lacking real depth or expressive complexity—the implicit message reaching the consumer is very strong: this is the level that deserves attention, and this wine can be compared with the greats.

It is not a question of cost. The issue concerns the consistency between the standard one represents and the standard one legitimizes.

When the quality threshold is lowered for promotional reasons, the effect is not episodic. It is systemic.

How to choose a quality wine in a confusing media landscape

Today, many consumers search online for guidance on how to choose a quality wine, which wines to buy online, and which wine selection is truly reliable. In the absence of technical tools, they rely on those who appear more knowledgeable.

If that expertise is placed at the service of purely commercial logic, consumers no longer have a clear criterion for distinguishing between wine made for the market and wine made to express an identity.

The result is a gradual flattening of taste.

A cycle is created in which communication justifies the product, and the product justifies the communication, but the cultural level does not rise. Indeed, it tends to settle at an average standard that never challenges anything.

Cultural responsibility and wine selection

In wine, selection is not a neutral act. It is a curatorial gesture. It means assuming responsibility for presenting something as deserving of attention.

When someone who possesses symbolic capital uses that position to support wines that do not genuinely represent a high standard, they contribute—consciously or otherwise—to redefining the very concept of quality downward.

Wine culture is not built solely with iconic great bottles. It is built through everyday consistency. Through the ability to maintain a clear line between what is merely marketable and what is genuinely worthwhile.

My position: consistency between selection and conviction

For STELT, wine selection is not a tool for commercial saturation. It is a filtering process. Every bottle included in the catalog must possess identity, precision, and expressive consistency.

This is not elitism. It is alignment.

If a wine does not pass the test of personal conviction, it is not included. This approach reduces volume, but preserves credibility.

In the long term, credibility is worth more than any sponsorship.