The New York Times have released their list of the 53 places to go in 2008 and only one place in Australia was mentioned, the Barossa Valley:
The world’s love affair with shiraz is bringing wine spectators to Australia’s Barossa Valley. The hilly region is home to some of the world’s oldest shiraz vines, some dating back to the 1840s. And if the more than 60 wineries aren’t enough, Barossa also offers an artisanal cheese trail, and nearby Adelaide is a foodie destination in its own right.
There is a lot of problems with this New York Times list and the Barossa Valley is just a minor one. For starters Kuwait City made the list. I have to wonder if the people writing the article had even visited Kuwait City among a host of the other rather unspectacular places recommended in the article. At least Australia got one place recommended because northeast Asia was completely ignored. How do you recommend Kuwait City over destinations in China, Korea, Japan, and Mongolia? Heck Kuwait City was even ranked ahead of the Barossa Valley.
Anyway back to the Barossa Valley. The valley is a nice wine producing area, but would I recommend people travel all the way to Australia just to go visit the Barossa Valley? No way. The Yarra Valley area near Melbourne and the Margaret River area near Perth have just as many wineries, are more scenic, and have more things to do in the surrounding areas besides visit wineries. Visitors to Australia wanting to visit wineries while visiting the country would get a lot more out of their trip by visiting these areas. I would even say stopping by the Hunter Valley in New South Wales would be a better option than going all the way out to the Barossa Valley.
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?