Santo Stefano, a sparkling wine produced by Eurasian Alcohol Group, is at the center of a defamation dispute raised by the company against wine blogger Elena Kulikova. The dispute concerns a critical Instagram post by Kulikova and centers on how the drink is described and labeled.
According to EAG, the blogger’s post criticized the product and called out several alleged inaccuracies to a large audience. The company asserts that Kulikova’s post, published two years ago, included multiple claims that they view as misleading. EAG has requested that Kulikova delete the post, publish a corrective statement, and pay a state duty of 6,000 rubles as part of the remedy process.
In the blogger’s post, several points are claimed to have been addressed: first, the product is bottled in the Moscow region but is presented as Santo Stefano with an Italian alias; second, the beverage is described as a white sparkling wine that purportedly uses no grapes, instead relying on wine base, sugar, and additives; and third, the post claims the beverage contains 85 grams of sugar per liter, which the company contends is excessive and potentially harmful.
Representatives of Eurasian Alcohol Group disagree with Kulikova’s characterizations. They state that the wine is indeed bottled in the Moscow region and argue that Santo Stefano is a carbonated white semi-sweet drink rather than a traditional sparkling wine, implying a difference in categorization rather than a deception about its origin. The company emphasizes that there should be no expectation of white grapes in the bottle given its described formulation and style of production.
The matter has drawn attention due to the blogger’s audience reach and the potential impact of online reviews on consumer perception. The dispute highlights ongoing tensions between social media criticism and commercial branding, especially in the beverage sector where labeling, flavor profiles, and production methods are frequently scrutinized by enthusiasts and regulators alike. The case continues to unfold as both sides present their arguments and seek resolution through the appropriate channels. In reference to the broader landscape, this situation illustrates how digital platforms shape reputations and how businesses respond when online statements are perceived as inaccurate or damaging.