As you may have seen in the press, the International Riesling Foundation (IRF), headed up by Jim Tresize, also of the NY Grape and Wine Foundation, has spearheaded a new initiative to assist consumers with better identifying the wine style of a particular Riesling prior to purchase. Journalist Dan Berger is credited with leading the charge on this initiative.

Riesling is among the fastest growing wines, second to Pinot Noir, but many consumers seem to be confused or at least tunnel-visioned into thinking that Riesling is only a sweet wine. As this is not the case, the IRF wants to label Rieslings according to one of four categories: Dry, Medium Dry, Medium Sweet and Sweet.

This is a voluntary program for wine producers, with each category having scientific criteria assigned to it, based upon residual sugar, pH and acidity levels. Producers who wish to participate may choose among several logos, which have been designed to fit several different label formats, particularly for back labels.

As a wine educator, I think that yet another label will be a hindrance rather than helpful to consumers. It strikes me as dumbing things down to bring wine to a lower common denominator. Instead, I think it is important for wine educators, sommeliers, wine shop associates and others to educate consumers on the spot as to a wine’s attributes. Those consumers wishing to learn more, can begin to unravel the mysteries of German wine labels and terms such as Kabinett, Spatlese and Auslese. Moreover, these terms already stem from scientific criteria at least in terms of minimum must weights, so it would seem that the new program will create an additional item on the label for the consumer to interpret.

Additionally, I think that the category terms themselves might be somewhat subjective. While they are based on wine data, can one accurately describe the differential between a Medium Dry and a Medium Sweet wine? Without actually tasting a wine, would a consumer know whether s/he preferred a Medium Dry wine to a Medium Sweet one? Maybe Dry, Medium and Sweet would have been a better approach — less ambiguity perhaps?

Obviously, the goal is to sell more Riesling, but I’m not sure that this is the right way to do it.