Allegations that some candidates were tipped off to wines tasted
AI-generated image of wine glasses arranged for tasting
In early October 2018, the board of the Court of Master Sommeliers, Americas (CMSA) voted unanimously to suspend indefinitely the Master Sommelier credential awarded to all but one of an unprecedented 24 candidates who had passed its stringent annual membership exam a month previously at the Four Seasons Hotel St. Louis.[1] The decision was taken after the CMSA's board learned that one of its own members, Reggie Narito, had passed advance information about two of the six wines candidates had to identify during the blind tasting section, considered the most challenging of the three portions of the exam. Two of the successful candidates, to whom the information was known to have been passed (a third had failed), unsolicited, were barred from retaking the exam for five years. All the others were allowed to make up the exam in December at no charge; six passed. Narito was expelled from the organization[2]:4:38 and lost his Master Sommelier title.[3]
Aspiring Master Sommeliers often spend years, and considerable sums of money, acquiring the knowledge and experience necessary to pass the exam, the highest credential of the four the CMSA offers, which is only given to those invited to or recommended for it by those already members of the organization. The exam has an 8 percent pass rate; more people have been in space than become Master Sommeliers,[4] entitled to append "MS" to their names in any wine-related context. Those who succeed have often been rewarded with increased income and more lucrative jobs in the wine industry.
For those reasons, the candidates whose titles were suspended protested the CMSA's decision as not only costing them economically, but casting aspersions on their professional integrity, since they were never offered a chance to prove their innocence. The CMSA defended the decision as the only way to preserve the title's integrity since it could not be determined how many candidates had seen the tip as opposed to merely being sent it. It sustained its decision on internal appeal, but in the process left itself open to public criticism of its internal investigation of the incident as cursory, secretive, and perhaps tainted by conflicts of interest. Rumors that the board's real motivation had been preventing public disclosure of earlier exams tainted by cheating were given credence in 2021 when a Vice article reported that a former candidate said the board had been aware of cheating on the exam almost 10 years earlier yet took no action save tightening testing procedures for the next exam. The affair has also given rise to more general criticism of the opacity of the exam administration process and CMSA's governance in general.
Some of those suspended have continued to pursue the title, a few succeeded; the exam has not been held since 2019 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Others, alienated by the CMSA's handling of the matter and a later sexual harassment scandal, have lost interest in ever becoming Master Sommeliers; some have decided to pursue the competing Master of Wine certification. One of the latter, Dan Pilkey, continued to use the "MS" post-nominal in social media posts about wine, and wear the lapel pin, even after the board suspended it. The CMSA sued him for infringement of its collective membership mark; the case was dismissed on procedural grounds and not refiled.
Background
The first Master Sommelier exam was held in the United Kingdom in 1969; the Court of Master Sommeliers was established as a governing body for the exam in that country eight years later.[1] In 1986, the first American exam was held, and the American branch of the Court formally organized in its wake.[5] The Court's goal is to "encourage improved standards of beverage knowledge and service in hotels and restaurants." Many of those who have earned the title work outside the hospitality sector, for wineries or distributors. or as consultants.[3]
Master Sommelier is the highest of four levels of certification the Court confers. Before attempting the annual exam candidates are required to have already passed the Introductory, Certified and Advanced Sommelier courses and exams, and worked in the hospitality industry in a wine-related capacity for at least 10 years. Candidates can only take the exam if invited or recommended by a member of the Court, and must still pay the exam fee of US$995 for each of three portions.[6]
The three portions are:
Theory: A 50-minute oral exam in which the candidate is asked questions meant to elicit answers demonstrating their knowledge of viticulture such as what grape varietals are grown and made into wine in various countries and wine-producing regions, the winemaking process and its science and history, and the laws that govern the wine industries in key regions such as, but not limited to, the United States, Australia, and the European Union and its member countries like France. Knowledge of beer, spirits and cigars must also be demonstrated. Candidates must pass the Theory portion before they can take the other two; the pass rate is roughly 10 percent.[7]
Practical Service: A test of the candidate's professional skills in which examiners play the part of diners whom the candidate is to recommend and properly serve wine appropriate to the dish purportedly ordered, sitting at a table set by the candidate.[7] Examiners often act like difficult customers[3] in order to test the candidate's ability to, as the Court puts it, "handle questions and complaints with skill, elegance and diplomacy".[7]
Tasting: Considered the most challenging portion since it requires candidates to correctly identify the vintage, year and region of six wines, three red and three white, served blindly, as well as comment on and describe the taste, in 25 minutes. It has been recalled as "a total mindfuck" by those who have taken it[3] since unlike the other two portions, if the candidate fails it there is no way to learn from the experience and improve for the next attempt as the wines used are changed each time.[4][lower-alpha 1]
A 75 percent score is required on each portion to pass (in contrast to the 60 percent passing criterion for the lower-level exams). Once they have passed Theory, candidates must pass the other two sections in the next three years to become Master Sommeliers; if they do not they must start the process again. In the history of the exam only nine people have passed all three portions on their first attempt; the Court has awarded them a trophy known as the Krug Cup. Overall it is estimated that of out every 70 candidates only one eventually passes,[6] as happened in one 2013 sitting of the exam.[9]As of 2021[update], 269 people have passed the exam and become Master Sommeliers,[3] fewer people than have been in space.[4] The exam's overall pass rate is 8 percent, leading to it being called one of the world's most difficult tests to pass.[10]
To prepare for the exam, as shown in the 2012 documentary film Somm and itssequels, aspiring Master Sommeliers cultivate relationships with those already Masters as a form of mentoring. They spend large quantities of their own money purchasing expensive wines to practice for the tasting portion.[lower-alpha 2] Often they go into debt in the process, knowing that passing the exam and earning the MS will approximately double their income, to around $160,000, and allow them to pay those debts off. They also forgo a social life to study 20–30 hours a week, and often retain sports psychologists.[4] "It requires a level of dedication that's almost a sickness", one Master said in 2021; it has also been compared to the process of becoming a Shaolin warrior monk.[3]
2018 exam
The Four Seasons St. Louis, where the 2018 exam was given
In early September 2018, 141 candidates, including some from outside the U.S., attempted the exam at the Four Seasons Hotel St. Louis over three days.[1] On the morning of the Tasting portion, one of the candidates, Elton Nichols, recalled later receiving an email from Reggie Narito, at the time vice president for fine wines at California-based Young's Market Company[12] and not only a Master Sommelier, but a member of the Court's board and one of the exam proctors that day. The subject line was "Heads up" with "PG, CndP" in the body. Nichols, who was acquainted slightly with Narito, having gone to Narito's house in the Bay Area from his own home in Seattle several times to taste wines along with other aspiring Master Sommeliers, understood this to mean pinot gris and Châteauneuf-du-Pape, two of the wines that candidates would be challenged to identify that day.[3]
Nichols immediately deleted the email, but did nothing else. If, he reasoned, a Master Sommelier as prominent within the Court as Narito was involved in giving candidates advance information they were not supposed to have, others might also be, and informing any of the Court's officials present would not be productive. Nichols took the exam and passed, although he missed identifying one of the two wines in Narito's email.[3] At the end of the day he would be one of 24 candidates to become Master Sommeliers, a success rate never achieved on any other exam. One had passed all three portions on his first attempt and was awarded the Krug Cup.[1]
Cheating allegations, investigation and aftermath
The newly credentialed Masters swiftly enjoyed the benefits of their position, receiving salary increases at their present jobs and fielding offers for new positions and business opportunities. Five weeks after the exam, the Court's board was approached by an attorney for one of that year's unsuccessful candidates, a woman who had also received Narito's email and, it was later disclosed, had previously been romantically involved with the Court's vice president, Matt Stamp.[13][lower-alpha 3] The attorney shared the email with the board, which immediately convened a special committee of its own to investigate.[3]
After a three-day investigation over the first weekend of October, the special committee reported to an emergency meeting of the full board, from which it had recused Narito. After the special committee reported on the methodology of its investigation, the board voted unanimously, after much discussion, to revoke Narito's title and expel him from the Court, an action the board has never publicly confirmed; it is recorded in the meeting's minutes.[2]:4:38 Narito reportedly parted ways with his employer, as well; neither confirmed it to the media but shortly afterwards, Narito's LinkedIn profile indicated he was looking for work, which a Young's spokeswoman pointed out to the media.[14][lower-alpha 4]
The special committee then explained to the board that while it had learned that the email had been sent to just three candidates, and it did not appear that any of the recipients had solicited the information from Narito, it was impossible to tell if those three had shared the email with others. After much debate, the board voted, again unanimously, with several members including the vice president recusing themselves, to suspend the Master Sommelier titles[2]:4:38 of 23 of those who had gained it in September, including Krug Cup winner Van Wagner. The one remaining new Master kept his title due to having passed the Tasting portion in a previous year.[12]
To offset the loss of their titles, the board scheduled a makeup exam for December and waived the fee for those who wanted to retake it, except two: Nichols and the other successful candidate who had received the email.[lower-alpha 5] They were barred from retaking the exam for five years,[3] after which they would have to petition the board to be allowed to take it again.[12] Most of the rest took the makeup exam, which only six passed.[17]
All but four whose titles had been suspended organized as a group[3] and appealed the Court's decision in a joint letter, demanding reinstatement and an apology.[4] They were particularly upset by the haste with which the board had conducted its investigation and reached its decision, which they said could have better distinguished those innocent of cheating. The board had refused their offers to provide statements, take lie detector tests or allow their phones and other devices to be examined.[3][2]:2:50–3:05 It had also declined an offer by Young's CEO, Narito's former superior, to provide copies of other emails he had sent, which included the names of those the original email had been bcc'ed to.[12]
Three others from the group of 23 passed the exam in 2019 and regained their titles.[8] The exam has not been offered since then due to the COVID-19 pandemic; the Court has tolled the three-year limit for any candidates who have already passed one portion to pass the entire exam. Candidates are also allowed to request that certain Master Sommeliers recuse themselves from grading their exams.[18]As of November2021[update], the Court had announced the next Theory examination would be held July 2022 in Dallas, with the Service and Tasting portions to be held in September at a date and location to be determined later.[7]
Some of those whose titles were revoked were so alienated that they decided not to make any further attempts to regain it. "I want to find a different industry to work in", one of them told the wine news site SevenFifty after the scandal broke. "I want this to be over."[12] Jane Lopes, the first woman in Australia to have gained Master Sommelier status,[19] wrote:
In examining my reasons for taking the exam in the first place, I found several: to pursue excellence in my profession, to prove to myself that I could do it in spite of my particular challenges, and to be in a position to educate, mentor, and influence in the industry. I know now that I don't need the letters "MS" after my name to pursue the first, prove that I did the second, or be in a position to do the third.[16]
Nichols and Dan Pilkey, who had been attempting to pass the exam since 2010[2]:0:45-0:50 and did not pass the free December retest, have both said they are not interested in regaining their titles by any means other than the Court's board admitting its mistake and reinstating them. Pilkey, joking that "the best way to get over a breakup is to find a new partner", has opted instead to pursue the Master of Wine certificate.[12]
Criticism of investigation
The board's decision to investigate the matter internally also drew criticism. "I look at this from a business perspective", said Ken Frederickson, a 19-year Master Sommelier who founded a high-end Chicago-based wine and spirits distributor. "This type of situation would always be investigated by an outside organization"[2]:3:30–3:45 due to the potential or actual conflicts of interest involved. Dustin Wilson, a New York wine store owner whose successful bid to become a Master was the focus of Somm, notes that despite the board's vice president acknowledging his conflict due to his past relationship with the woman who had brought Narito's email to the board's attention, he was still part of the special committee that conducted the investigation. "That shows you it's really just an old boys club," he commented.[2]:5:05–5:20
Critics also found the board to have been overly secretive about its investigation. When its members first learned of the allegations, then-president Devon Broglie warned members several times not to discuss the matter with anyone outside the Court, and after it became public discouraged them from speaking to the media. A few days after the scandal broke, Nichols decided to go to the board himself and disclose that he, too, had received Narito's email. The board thanked him for coming forward but asked him not to tell anyone else that he had done so, which he found odd. Nichols had also planned to make that disclosure to the group of 19 suspended Masters, but before he did someone close to the Court let Dan Pilkey, a leader of the group, know that there was another person among them who had received the email. The ensuing discord among the group when Nichols admitted it was him was later perceived by some of the former Masters as a deliberate attempt to undermine their unity.[3]
Eventually some members of the suspended group got copies of the minutes of the October board meeting where it had voted to expel Narito and invalidate the tasting exam results. The description of the investigation's methodology had been redacted in its entirety, as well as passages recounting what was described as lengthy debate preceding the motions to expel Narito and invalidate the results.[2]:4:38 The entire document has been compared to something that might have been released by the CIA.[3]
Possible cheating on previous exams
Suspicion grew among the suspended Masters that the board's handling of the incident reflected not incompetence so much as malfeasance, that its main goal had been to forestall the disclosures that might have come from a full investigation. They noted that Narito had not tried to conceal what he was doing, to the point of even using his work email account. That suggested that he felt little or no risk of consequences, that he or others had done this before and that it was cheating on earlier exams, including some where board members had earned their Master titles, they did not want disclosed.[3]
In 2021, Arthur Black, a onetime Master candidate himself who taught many classes and performed other services for the Court but never passed the exam despite his stellar performance on the Theory section (he believes his outspokenness alienated some key members) shared with Vice an account of a conversation he had had with a prominent Master he did not name during the 2009 exam. It had long been customary for candidates taking the Theory portion to reconstruct the questions they had been asked and compile them into a study guide for their own, and others', future attempts at the exam. That year, rumors had circulated that some candidates who sat the exam in the morning had emailed questions they remembered to others who took it that afternoon.[3]
Over billiards that evening, the Master asked Black what he knew about the "breach" of the exam that day. Unlike the 2018 exam, no action was ever taken by the board against anyone involved. The following year exam procedures were changed; candidates were sequestered and their phones were taken during the Theory portion, a procedure that has been followed since.[3]
Lawsuits
After failing the retest, on which he said he felt like he was "playing not to lose", Pilkey began adding "MS" to his social media posts about wine and wearing the red lapel pin identifying him as a Master Sommelier, disregarding the Court's withdrawal of his title. The Court sent him letters ordering him to cease and desist or be sued for membership infringement, as it owns the Master Sommelier trademark and with it the exclusive right to say who can call themselves one. Pilkey responded by challenging the Court to proceed with suit as he believed he had fairly earned the title and unjustly been denied further use of it.[3][12]
In June 2019 the Court filed an action against Pilkey in federal court for the Northern District of California, where it is based. A group of Masters who had been critical of the board's handling of the exam paid for Pilkey's attorney, who was able to get the case dismissed by the end of the year on a procedural issue:[3] CMSA had asserted the court had personal jurisdiction over Pilkey, a resident of Chicago, because of his employment as Midwest regional sales director for a California-based winery, his past personal ties to the state, and his social media posts about California wines, including geotags mentioning specific locations in the state as where the accompanying pictures were taken. The court agreed with Pilkey that the first two were not enough to establish jurisdiction and while the third might have been, they did not qualify as commercial endeavors since his sales territory did not include California and the wines in question were available anywhere in the United States.[20][lower-alpha 6] By that time Pilkey had stopped claiming the title publicly, wording his LinkedIn profile's header to say only that he passed the September 2018 exam.[21]
Pilkey learned from the Court's filings in response to the lawsuit that the Master Sommelier titles he and the other 22 had held briefly were not, in fact, revoked but merely suspended.[12] While he has disdained further interest in regaining the title, in 2021 he still expressed his desire that the Court admit its mistake, apologize, and give him and the other 20 who did not receive the email the chance to accept the title as long as they wanted to.[3]
In 2022 Pilkey, Van Wagner and Peter Bothwell, a third person whose MS had been suspended, filed suit in federal court against CMS and associated individuals, including Narito. They alleged that the investigation of the cheating was cursory, intended to keep past misdeeds from becoming public knowledge, and that they were thus unfairly punished. The board never interviewed Narito nor reviewed his emails, they alleged in their complaint, and none of the 23 candidates who had passed the taste test that day were interviewed.[22]
Catalyst for efforts to reform Court and exam
The September 2018 class of Masters were not the only ones associated with the organization who found its handling of the exam results disturbing. Their concerns focused not just on the way the exam had historically been administered but the Court's governance as well.[12] They were heightened after a sexual harassment scandal reported in 2020 forced the resignation of the entire board.[3][lower-alpha 7]
Starting with the 2019 exam the Court began putting in place new security procedures, including sequestering proctors as well as candidates and requiring them to surrender their electronic devices. Proctors are also not allowed to be alone with a candidate at any time during the exam. The exam itself is also becoming more compartmentalized, so that no single proctor knows all the material being tested or all the candidates taking the exam.[12]
Critics believe those reforms are not enough. They point to the opacity of the exam and its grading as a root cause of the scandal and ensuing discontent. Candidates are never told what their exact score was on each portion of the exam,[4] only that they passed, and on the Tasting portion the identities of the wine are never revealed. Pilkey has noted the contrast with the tasting sessions in the Master of Wine training, which does share with students what wines they tasted, and finds it more conducive to learning.[12]
Even one of the Court's board members, Joseph Spellman, agrees that more transparency on the test would be for the better. "I have long wished", he wrote in a Facebook post after the scandal, "that we revealed at least some info on the wines after the exams." He admitted he was in the minority, and as long as the board's exam committee insists on reserving the right to change the sequence and/or selection of wines, or how they are scored, to compensate for flaws in the exam process, that is unlikely to change. Spellman also confirmed that the exam procedure gives the proctors the right to change candidates' scores after the exam,[2]:6:10–6:20 lending support to rumors that proctors had often lobbied for extra points for preferred candidates after the exams had been administered.[2]:5:50–6:10
From the outset of the scandal, Wilson, Frederickson and a group of other longtime Masters including wine writer Richard Betts and Lopes' husband Jonathan Ross, had joined the calls to reinstate the suspended titles, investigate more thoroughly and reform the way the Court was run. "There should be a good amount of transparency between the broader membership and the decisions being made by the board", Wilson said. He and others noted that the Court, a 501(c)(6)nonprofit under U.S. tax law, reported revenues of $4.5 million in 2017, which would be more than enough to hire a full-time nonmember with experience to run the organization; Frederickson also points out that the scandal shows the need for a human resources (HR) department.[12]
Instead, the Court has persisted with having the head of its board serve as its executive, notwithstanding his own professional responsibilities, if any. Like all members of the board, his Court duties are unpaid. Under the Court's bylaws, candidates for board seats must have been Masters for three years, and teach at least four courses or proctor as many exams while they serve as directors. Wilson says this results in the board becoming "an insiders' club... [that] limits the scope of perspective of the group running the organization."[12]
During 2019, the board responded to some concerns. It had the Court join the Institute for Credentialing Excellence, and explored the possibility of hiring an outsider to run its daily operations, and explored providing more organizational support for those operations and the examinations as well as looking at companies that could provide HR support.[12] In 2020, responding to concerns that its culture was racially exclusionary in the wake of highly publicized Black Lives Matter protests, the board dropped the requirement that all Masters be addressed by others with that title and their last name at Court functions.[24]
After The New York Times reported on a culture of longterm sexual harassment within the organization in 2020,[lower-alpha 8] some of the most respected and prominent Masters, including former vice president Stamp and Court cofounder Fred Dame, were suspended from Court activities.[13][lower-alpha 9]Alpana Singh, the youngest woman and the first Indian American to make Master Sommelier, renounced her title in support of the women,[25] and the entire board resigned in advance of that year's elections.[3]
In addition to Singh, Betts also left the Court in protest, saying he wished he had done it sooner since the organization "no longer aligns with [his] views".[24] Another Master, Bobby Stuckey, owner and sommelier of Frasca Food and Wine in Boulder, Colorado, has stopped teaching the Advanced Sommelier class until reforms have been made. "I'm into hospitality, and hospitality is about always thinking about the other person", he said. "The way we have treated these candidates doesn't do that."[26]
To facilitate reform, all the board members resigned before the 2020 elections. Their replacements included two women, one of whom, Emily Wines, became chair.[27] The Court's new board held listening sessions around the country in an effort to be more open with members, but said nothing regarding the cheating scandal.[3] Later, it hired a professional ethicist to overhaul its code in that area, another firm to transform its workplace culture, and another investigator for the harassment allegations, leading to the expulsion of Dame and Stamp. It also reached outside the organization for the first time to hire executive director Julie Cohen Theobald, and later four board members from outside the wine industry. Lastly, it created a hundred scholarships for people of color, women and people in need, and putting the training programs online in order to diversify the organization.[27]
Notes
↑ One successful candidate reports having taken the Theory exam 10 times over 16 years.[8]
↑ One Master Sommelier estimated that his total costs had come to $30,000 over the 10–12 years he had spent preparing.[11]
↑ Stamp had reportedly failed to disclose the relationship to the board as required by Court policy, as well as another sexual relationship with another woman who took the exam, and resigned from the board shortly afterwards, a decision he later described through an attorney as mutual.[13]
↑ As of 2021[update] Narito's profile stated he left Young's in October 2018; he gives no current employer.[15] He has declined all requests for comment.[14][3]
↑ According to Jane Lopes, one of the candidates whose MS was suspended, there have been rumors of a fourth recipient.[16]
↑ Internet law expert Eric Goldman found the court's logic on the geotags might become precedential in a future case as it could be seen as clearly evincing intent on a defendant's part to communicate to or with a particular geographic region, possibly leading to a holding opposite to the one found in Pilkey's case.[21]
↑ In late 2021 the new board voted to expel six Masters, including Stamp, after investigating, and barred Geoff Kruth, who had already been expelled, from ever applying for reinstatement. Some of the accusers and George Linder, one of the expelled Masters, said that others who had been accused of more serious misbehavior "got a pass". Linder said that those men had in some cases "groomed" preferred female candidates in preparation for sexual relationships.[23]
↑ Among the women making allegations was Lopes.[13]
↑ Both men were among the six expelled from the Court a year later.[23]
Related Research Articles
A sommelier, or wine steward, is a trained and knowledgeable wine professional, normally working in fine restaurants, who specializes in all aspects of wine service as well as wine and food pairing. The role of the sommelier in fine dining today is much more specialized and informed than that of a wine waiter. Sommeliers Australia states that the role is strategically on par with that of the chef de cuisine.
Blinded wine tasting is wine tasting undertaken in circumstances in which the tasters are kept unaware of the wines' identities. The blind approach is routine for wine professionals who wish to ensure impartiality in the judgment of the quality of wine during wine competitions or in the evaluation of a sommelier for professional certification. More recently wine scientists have used blinded tastings to explore the objective parameters of the human olfactory system as they apply to the ability of wine drinkers to identify and characterize the extraordinary variety of compounds that contribute to a wine’s aroma. Similarly, economists testing hypotheses relating to the wine market have used the technique in their research. Some blinded trials among wine consumers have indicated that people can find nothing in a wine's aroma or taste to distinguish between ordinary and pricey brands. Academic research on blinded wine tastings have also cast doubt on the ability of professional tasters to judge wines consistently.
Wine fraud relates to the commercial aspects of wine. The most prevalent type of fraud is one where wines are adulterated, usually with the addition of cheaper products and sometimes with harmful chemicals and sweeteners.
Bien Nacido Vineyards is cool-climate vineyard on the central coast of California. Located midway up the Santa Maria Valley, it is known for growing Burgundian and Rhone varieties of wine grapes. Bien Nacido has the distinction of being one of the major viticultural nurseries in the state for certified, varietal budwood. Most of the vines were originally from stock grown by the University of California at Davis. While the average increase block in California is less than 10 acres (40,000 m2), Bien Nacido Vineyards has several hundred acres of certified Chardonnay, Pinot Noir, Merlot and a number of other varieties. Much of the Chardonnay planted in California in the last twenty years began as Bien Nacido Vineyards cuttings.
Alpana Singh is an American Master Sommelier, restaurateur and local television personality in Chicago, Illinois.
Martin Winterkorn is a German former business executive who served as chairman of the board of management of Volkswagen AG, the parent company of the Volkswagen Group, as well as chairman of the supervisory board of Audi, and chairman of the board of management of Porsche Automobil Holding SE. He succeeded Bernd Pischetsrieder as CEO of Volkswagen AG in 2007. Prior to that, he had been chairman of the board of management at the Volkswagen Group subsidiary Audi AG.
The Wine & Spirit Education Trust, often referred to as WSET, is a global organization which arranges courses and exams in the fields of wine, spirits, beer, and sake. WSET was founded in 1969, is headquartered in London and is generally regarded as one of the world's leading providers of drinks education. In 2016, it opened its first international office, WSET Asia Pacific, in Hong Kong in response to high demand for drinks education across Greater China. In 2018, it opened WSET Americas in Hartford, CT, USA.
The Court of Master Sommeliers (CMS) is an educational organisation established in 1977 to encourage improved standards of beverage service by sommeliers, particularly in wine and food pairing. From the court's inception through 2018, a worldwide total of 274 people have earned its Master Sommelier diploma, the highest level.
The 2012 Harvard cheating scandal involved approximately 125 Harvard University students who were investigated for cheating on the take-home final examination of the spring 2012 edition of Government 1310: "Introduction to Congress". Harvard announced the investigation publicly on August 30, 2012. Dean of Undergraduate Education Jay M. Harris described the case as "unprecedented in its scope and magnitude". The Harvard Crimson ranked the scandal as the news story most important to Harvard in 2012.
Italian Sommelier Association, 'AIS' is an Italian non-profit organization founded in Milan on July 7, 1965, officially recognised and legally acknowledged by the Italian government on April 6, 1973, with formal President of the Republic decree #539 in 1973. Its founding members were Prof. Gianfranco Botti, Jean Valenti, Leonardo Guerra and Italian sommelier Ernesto Rossi. Italian Sommelier Association is part and founding member of the Worldwide Sommelier Association (WSA), which is officially recognized across the world, wherever it is present with an affiliate. AIS is one of the oldest and actually the largest sommelier association in the world.
The Vyapam scam was an entrance examination, admission and recruitment scam. It was functional since the 1990s and was finally unearthed in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh in 2013.
Somm is a 2012 American documentary following the attempts of four candidates to pass the extremely difficult Master Sommelier examination, a test with one of the lowest pass rates in the world. Directed by Jason Wise, a sequel, Somm: Into the Bottle, was released in 2015 and a third film, Somm 3, came out in October 2018. A TV series based on the movie launched on the Esquire Network in November 2015. In 2019, SOMM TV was launched by creator Jason Wise with original shows.
Peter Neptune is an American wine expert and educator as well as a former television and NY stage actor. He is one of only 147 Master Sommeliers in North America, as of June 2015, and is the founder of the Orange County, CA-based Neptune School of Wine. He appeared on and off Broadway in 1984 and 1985, appeared in numerous television movies and series from 1988 through 1990, and appeared as himself in the 2013 wine documentary SOMM.
In 2019, a scandal arose over a criminal conspiracy to influence undergraduate admissions decisions at several top American universities. The investigation into the conspiracy was code named Operation Varsity Blues. The investigation and related charges were made public on March 12, 2019, by United States federal prosecutors. At least 53 people have been charged as part of the conspiracy, a number of whom pleaded guilty or agreed to plead guilty. Thirty-three parents of college applicants were accused of paying more than $25million between 2011 and 2018 to William Rick Singer, organizer of the scheme, who used part of the money to fraudulently inflate entrance exam test scores and bribe college officials. Of the 32 parents named in a Federal Bureau of Investigation affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in Boston, more than half had apparently paid bribes to have their children enrolled at the University of Southern California (USC).
There have been many controversies concerning Eton College, sometimes called the most famous school in the world. In 2005, The Guardian claimed that "Eton is no stranger to scandalous allegations, nor to claims that it tries to prevent them leaking out."
Racism in the wine industry is a type of systemic bias and institutionalized racism that has resulted in low participation in the industry by persons of color.
Marc Almert is a German sommelier and 2019 World's Best Sommelier.
Fred Dame is an American wine professional.
Emily Wines is an American wine professional and as of December 2020 board chair of the Court of Master Sommeliers (CMS) of the United States.
Geoff Kruth is an American wine professional. He founded and was president of GuildSomm, a nonprofit that helps prepare candidates for the Master Sommelier exam, and was featured in the 2012 documentary SOMM as an expert on the process of becoming certified as a Master Sommelier.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
