Beware of Food Writers!

Online opinions are expressed and read each day regarding every topic imaginable (and some I’d rather not imagine). Food is a hot topic for musings, but troubling trends are emerging…as the quantity of bloggers and information available increases…the quality and content may be getting worse.

When it comes to restaurants, anyone can quickly post on a variety of blog sites (Chowhound, Urban Spoon, etc.) and receive immediate feedback from fellow users. Freedom of expression and exchanging good information is cool, but take note: online forums have little accountability for “posters”, zero validation of source integrity…and everyone has an opinion…!

Regardless of the quality of some posts (there are knowledgeable people), these sites attract people like Pavlov lured his hounds. So who is credible? How can you tell? Why do know-it-alls respond to almost EVERY post and make newbies feel foolish? Don’t these jackals have lives? Does reciting the location of every restaurant selling roasted goat curds wrapped in pig ears make some Google-using smartass a culinary expert?

I do not fault foodie sites for attracting a few gourmet outcasts. They need user traffic to make money and I still post content despite the oddballs, but if the role of these forums is to facilitate information exchange and promote food discussions why are topical posts sometimes chastised by people who do not seem capable of writing anything more than snarky responses? They critique others without offering any value and with no intended purpose. I picture an army of nerds lurking on keyboards who lie in wait, ready to pounce on anything they judge to be a dumb question or pointless, wanting to prove they know more than everyone else as though a gold star is at stake! Though I tolerate debates with the keyboard crowd and their coffee toting sidekicks, they become tiresome and discourage new users.

Aside from crazies, key issues with the quality and volume of information being tossed up exist…it is non-stop…like puke on prom night. If a Poster states that restaurant XYZ has bad service and the worst meatballs in the history of cuisine, readers don’t know if they are being offered an educated opinion without bias or just a rant from some Rachel Ray IM-poster who prefers spamballs. Blogger credibility poses an interesting dilemma for readers and restauranteurs alike. The frustration expressed to me by industry staff is often directed at pretenders who could not tell a meatball from a baseball but are commenting anyway. Having their umm…balls…in the hands of these bloggers is a tough piece of meat to swallow. Educating customers is part of their job, but how do restaurants educate critics who cannot spell vichyssoise AND complain that it is cold?

Anyone with an agenda (perhaps a competitor?) or a half-cocked notion of what good service is or what meatballs should taste like can post and drum up responses. The web is idiot proof in this respect. Intended or not, contributors to blog sites can hurt the business of a restaurant without really knowing what the hell they are talking about. I would love to compare the know-it-all crowd’s knowledge with the industry pros they critique. Most times it’s no contest.

Beyond the foodie blog sites anyone can spin up a website, personal blog, or post kooky videos on YouTube (like me!). Whether the opinions expressed or information provided are valid and accurate is irrelevant and worse yet, methodology is rarely a serious consideration whether they are amateur reviewers or “professionals”.

When it comes to providing opinions or critiques that may impact restaurants or food purveyors, what guidelines should food bloggers/writers/critics/etc. consider? I posed this query to several industry contacts local and abroad in an effort to gauge opinions and the value they place in “what” they read and “who” they read. From insights I gathered and in reviewing several foodie blogs/posts/books, I offer the following to help evaluate what, and who, you read…

1. Anonymity can be crucial in understanding how to interpret the “reviewer” experience compared to your experience.

If you think you are going to be treated the way John Gilchrist is treated by some of the restaurants he writes about, think again. Recognized reviewers should acknowledge that their “cover is blown” to add context or disguise themselves for your benefit (a la Ruth Reichl). Announcing their presence or worse yet, calling a restaurant to notify them (some ask for freebies!) of an upcoming review erases all credibility.

Accepting invitations to dine and then writing about the experience is a no-no. You’d be shocked at how many magazines looking for advertising revenue play these kinds of games with restaurants. I have turned down offers to write because reviews were going to be tied to advertisers. No thanks! Next time you see a glowing review in a magazine or paper, check the list of advertisers.

I know my name is flagged in reservations books or they know my face and there is no chance of me being anonymous so I own up to it and I compare notes with people I send to these restaurants on my behalf who do dine anonymously. This works nicely to help confirm my opinions, good or bad…no rocket science required.

2. The key advantage amateur food reviews offer is anonymity, but amateurs don’t always make the best reviewers. Recognize this catch 22!

An example: anytime someone writes about a negative experience and mentions bad food, poor service, or whatever else may have been wrong, I look for a few things.

First, did they confront the restaurant and provide an opportunity to have the situation remedied? Anyone who is willing to fire away in writing afterwards without addressing issues in person probably is not worth reading. It’s beyond weak and industry people I surveyed used the word “cowardly” to describe this approach. Mistakes happen (no place is perfect) so I like to know what a restaurant did to repair a situation because it speaks to how serious they are about customer service and I prefer to spend money where they care about customers. Leaving out this feedback provides zero value to readers and is unfair to businesses.

Second, regardless of what may have been “off”, does the writer describe what was wrong specifically? If not, it may indicate the issue is a matter of personal taste or an agenda is at work. If it is a matter of personal taste, it should be made clear in order to be fair. When reading particularly negative (or even positive) comments, consider carefully if they seem to understand what they are writing about through their use of descriptors or adjectives. Good or bad, some reviews are devoid of value because they lack perspective or the finesse that allows readers to feel like they are at the table themselves.

Lastly, when interpreting unstructured comments on blog sites, take it with a grain of salt or ask the Poster to elaborate on their opinions. It will become clear quickly who knows their stuff and who is an IM-poster!

3. Formal reviews should not be based on one visit and when they are, writers should make it clear for their readers.

No restaurant is perfect. Every kitchen has an off-night. All servers have bad days. Though they strive for consistency in all phases, it is very difficult to achieve. The best reviews offer a broader perspective than a single dinner or lunch. This is why negative comments by “one-timers” can be so frustrating for industry staff. Without repeated experiences, how do you know whether a given criticism is a one-time mishap versus something to expect each time someone visits? Look for people who write about repeated experiences, not just single instances. One nice advantage I do see with blog sites is having other readers validate experiences, good or bad, from their collective visits.

4. Related to #3…context is important to understanding the reviewer’s experience.

I read reviews that hammer restaurants with keen interest (I hate feeling ripped off too). Many express valid points, but after digging in to some reviews (because experiences varied wildly from mine) I uncovered a few tidbits… one writer did not admit to showing up 15 minutes before the kitchen closed on Valentine’s Day, another did not even pay for their meal, and a third was told the kitchen was closing prior to convincing a server to take their last minute order. Restaurants in each instance were then slammed minus any context. Is it surprising staff was pissed when bad reviews were posted?

Is it fair practice to tell readers that restaurant XYZ sucked in a one-shot review minus the context? Absolutely not! While I believe consistency is key to successful restaurants and we all deserve to receive good value at all times, common sense dictates that some bad experiences result from circumstance and this should be made clear to readers.

If you are dumb enough to pay top dollar, late in the evening, on a pseudo holiday when the chef is long gone and expect perfection, you qualify as an oxygen thief. Please proceed to base camp on Mount Delusional! Ever read Kitchen Confidential? Do not order seafood on a Monday ring any bells? It’s the same premise, so unless there is additional bad history with a restaurant it weak practice to ridicule them without being honest about the context of a visit.

5. Stars only matter if they come from Michelin.

Unless they write for the Red Guide giving star ratings or scores is a subjective matter and they are irrelevant. If a reviewer sings the praises of a resto, do you really care whether it gets 4 out of 5 stars or 7 out of 10? And what separates 3 stars from 4 anyway? No one ever lists their scoring criteria! I think a good review should stand on its own and does not require a scoring system, especially when there is no explanation or methodology behind it.

Cheers!

As a footnote...here is a video link that supports the spirit of my views above, enjoy!http://www.travelchannel.com//TV_Shows/Anthony_Bourdain/Video/Are_Restaurant_Reviews_Fair