Comped Meals - The Question of Ethics

[Miami Danny]

...the hunky baritone who is often staged shirtless....

←

Ahem. Now you've got my attention, dear boy...

Edited March 22, 2008 by Miami Danny (log)

[slkinsey]

My guess would be at least hundreds if not thousands of publications pay for reviewing meals.  Unless things have changed, in Philadelphia alone, the Inquirer, the Daily News, Philadelphia Magazine, the City Paper and I'm guessing the Philadelphia Weekly all pay for reviewing meals.

You're saying that you think that all these papers have a salaried restaurant reviewer and that these papers pay for the full cost of all meals eaten by the restaurant reviewer in performance of this function? All I can say is: don't be so sure. Don't be so sure that some of them aren't making the reviewer pay for his own meals out of his own pocket; or that some don't have such a small budget that the reviewer is forced to subsidize out of his own pocket.

Food writers don't have to review restaurants to get started.  One could suggest that the reading public would be better served if aspiring critics wrote about other aspects of food and restaurants - growers, chef's, dishwashers, a day in the life of a kitchen and such where no dollar outlay is required.  Might even make them better, more knowledgeable and more well rounded critics.

Okay. And how much of this kind of work is there to go around, realistically? Even the lowest end of freelance piecework in food writing involves scrounging up assignments to crank out 100 word blurbs on restaurants or bars for things like Time Out's web site -- a form of "reviewing" in other words, which would presumably not be allowed. Not to mention, how is the aspiring restaurant reviewer going to get any reasonable depth and breadth of experience that might make him a good reviewer, especially at the higher end, considering that I assume you would also frown upon comps for this person?

Of course, a person who worked away at this stuff as long, hard and successfully as it would take to accumulate the experience and reputation that might lead to one of the "company dime" salaried food writing jobs would, by that time, be a restaurant and food industry industry insider in that city, known to everyone in the business and with lots of relationships. This, in turn, would set off hundreds of "anonymity" and "professional/personal relationship" ethical alarms among the food writing police. Surely you wouldn't approve of that guy who wrote about the apprentice's first day in Ducasse's kitchen writing the review of Ducasse's restaurant. This kind of guy would get special treatment everywhere he went, and certainly couldn't be trusted to write an objective review of a restaurant where the chef gave him that great quote about sous vide, and the guy supplying the tomatoes appeared on that article he wrote about microgreens, and the head waiter is the one he trailed at a different restaurant for a week for that "front of the house" article last year, and, oh yea, the dishwasher is the one who hooked him up with that dude who delivers the best weed in town right to his door. So, in effect, you're suggesting that the aspiring writer guy work his ass off writing about growers, chefs, restaurateurs, dishwashers, reservationists, waiters, a day in the life of a kitchen and so on in one city (or perhaps lives nomadically for however long) in the hope that he'll get on someone's radar, whereupon he would then have to move to another city where he doesn't have any potentially ethically-conflicting relationships and is "anonymous" so he can take a job as that town's restaurant reviewer.

Well, no wonder there aren't many food writers who pass the ethical and quality test!

[Daniel Rogov]

... Since I agree with you, I'd like your imput on the following question: Can food critics be wrong? Can the clueless masses (of which I am one) be right? I would like to cite the following examples from art history: Ruskin had a really hard time with some of Whistler's stuff and-as you know-the critics hated Impressionism when it first burst on the art- scene.

Naftal, Hi...

Being eminently human and not one iota more, there is no question but that critics can and do err. The critic can err on anything from the description and evaluation of a specific dish or to the evaluation of an entire movement in the culinary world. If the error is made in good faith it is nothing but an error. If it is done out of malice or out of the need for self-promotion it is a sin. Errors are a heckuva lot easier to correct than sins. The trick of course is when realizing that one has erred is to admit it openly in your column. Not as a small box tucked away on page 27 but as the opening of your column.

As to what you refer to as "the clueless masses", let us keep in mind that the truest critics of the critics are precisely the people who read us. They, in the end are the ones who decide on the fate of both the restaurants and the critics in question.

Responding to several other comments and questions raised....

Critics should and do return to restaurants, both the good and the bad to see if they have changed, what is new, what remains, etc.... It is physically impossible to review each and every restaurant on multiple occasions but when major changes are noted they should be re-reviewed. That, by the way can be done in the form of a full column or even a mini-crit.

As to just which newspapers pay or do not pay for the meals of critics, let me make a suggestion. Build a list of the ten newspapers in the world you must trust for their editorial integrity. I would be willing to wager that a minimum of eight of those ten newspapers reimburse their critics. Make a second list of papers that you would least rely on for editorial integrity and I would surely suggest that although their restaurant critics do not starve, they surely need another job in order to support their passion.

And please, let us not forget passion. The critic (in any field whatever) who lacks it should not be a critic.

[slkinsey]

As to just which newspapers pay or do not pay for the meals of critics, let me make a suggestion.  Build a list of the ten newspapers in the world you must trust for their editorial integrity.  I would be willing to wager that a minimum of eight of those ten newspapers reimburse their critics. Make a second list of papers that you would least rely on for editorial integrity and I would surely suggest that although their restaurant critics do not starve, they surely need another job in order to support their passion.

I'm not arguing that newspapers shouldn't reimburse their restaurant critics. I think we'd all like it if there were more of that kind of thing. I'm just not willing to say that I think that the critics who are comped are ethically compromised such that their work can't equally valuable and valid compared to the reimbursed critics.

As I've said any number of times: There are food writers of whom I am aware, food writers I know dine to non-anonymously and I know to accept occasional comps, whose work I think is better, more reliable, more informative and more ethically sound than the writing of most any reimbursed, salaried food writer of which I am aware. I'm not sure I think the value of their work would be increased in my estimation if they were to land in fully reimbursed salaried newspaper or magazine gigs, but I'd certainly be happy for them if they did.

What I am certain of is that I wouldn't think they were any more ethically pure in their new reimbursed jobs than they had been prior. It's just removing one potential source of ethical conflict among hundreds. I sometimes have to wonder whether reimbursed salaried food old-media writers focus on this aspect of their craft because it is one of the few remaining advantages they have over their new-media peers.

[Miami Danny]

I sometimes have to wonder whether reimbursed salaried food old-media writers focus on this aspect of their craft because it is one of the few remaining advantages they have over their new-media peers.

←

So now we finally get to the REAL heart of your argument, SK. Perhaps it is not comped meal vs. paid meal that matters to you, really; or having ethical doubts (or not) about receiving comped meals, etc.....But non-paid writer versus "salaried" writer. You seem to be saying that anyone with a computer is as reliable as anyone else with a computer. That is a completely different argument my friend.

And I don't know about NYC, but here in Miami, a free meal is a ticket to a glowing write-up in the 'new-media' (by which I assume you mean bloggers). I'm guessing that probably happens more often than you'd care to believe, even (or perhaps especially), in New York.

[Holly Moore]

My guess would be at least hundreds if not thousands of publications pay for reviewing meals.  Unless things have changed, in Philadelphia alone, the Inquirer, the Daily News, Philadelphia Magazine, the City Paper and I'm guessing the Philadelphia Weekly all pay for reviewing meals.

You're saying that you think that all these papers have a salaried restaurant reviewer and that these papers pay for the full cost of all meals eaten by the restaurant reviewer in performance of this function? All I can say is: don't be so sure. Don't be so sure that some of them aren't making the reviewer pay for his own meals out of his own pocket; or that some don't have such a small budget that the reviewer is forced to subsidize out of his own pocket.

Food writers don't have to review restaurants to get started.  One could suggest that the reading public would be better served if aspiring critics wrote about other aspects of food and restaurants - growers, chef's, dishwashers, a day in the life of a kitchen and such where no dollar outlay is required.  Might even make them better, more knowledgeable and more well rounded critics.

Okay. And how much of this kind of work is there to go around, realistically? Even the lowest end of freelance piecework in food writing involves scrounging up assignments to crank out 100 word blurbs on restaurants or bars for things like Time Out's web site -- a form of "reviewing" in other words, which would presumably not be allowed. Not to mention, how is the aspiring restaurant reviewer going to get any reasonable depth and breadth of experience that might make him a good reviewer, especially at the higher end, considering that I assume you would also frown upon comps for this person?

Of course, a person who worked away at this stuff as long, hard and successfully as it would take to accumulate the experience and reputation that might lead to one of the "company dime" salaried food writing jobs would, by that time, be a restaurant and food industry industry insider in that city, known to everyone in the business and with lots of relationships. This, in turn, would set off hundreds of "anonymity" and "professional/personal relationship" ethical alarms among the food writing police. Surely you wouldn't approve of that guy who wrote about the apprentice's first day in Ducasse's kitchen writing the review of Ducasse's restaurant. This kind of guy would get special treatment everywhere he went, and certainly couldn't be trusted to write an objective review of a restaurant where the chef gave him that great quote about sous vide, and the guy supplying the tomatoes appeared on that article he wrote about microgreens, and the head waiter is the one he trailed at a different restaurant for a week for that "front of the house" article last year, and, oh yea, the dishwasher is the one who hooked him up with that dude who delivers the best weed in town right to his door. So, in effect, you're suggesting that the aspiring writer guy work his ass off writing about growers, chefs, restaurateurs, dishwashers, reservationists, waiters, a day in the life of a kitchen and so on in one city (or perhaps lives nomadically for however long) in the hope that he'll get on someone's radar, whereupon he would then have to move to another city where he doesn't have any potentially ethically-conflicting relationships and is "anonymous" so he can take a job as that town's restaurant reviewer.

Well, no wonder there aren't many food writers who pass the ethical and quality test!

←

I never said all those papers had "salaried" personnel. Many restaurant critics are freelance. The ones I referred to, if not salaried are paid for their columns and expensed for their meals.

As to the availability of writing work, that is the nature of professional writing. There are far more aspiring writers, be they food writers or whatever, than there are column inches. Those serious about pursuing such a career make it happen. A career in food writing can be achieved without accepting comps to write about a place.

As to writing about food to gain the visibility needed to be offered a critic's job and the possible disadvantage of such gained visibility for the restaurant critic:

1. Cherishing anonymity is as much an ego trip for food critics as it is essential for an accurate review. I've offered my rationale in other threads, so will summarize here - a savvy restaurant critic almost always knows when he has been spotted and is receiving special treatment, and can work around being known. There are many things a restaurant can't correct once a critic walks through the door. Besides which, after a few months of restaurant reviewing, restaurants likely will have passed around a picture of the critic and posted it on a bulletin board. Does that mean the critic has to resign since restaurants now know the critic's appearance?

2. Back of the house usually only knows a critic is there if the front of the house clues them in. That a writer spent a day with a chef doesn't mean the chef will use x-ray vision to see him in the dining room. Beyond that known people often don't get recognized in a busy restaurant, especially when they don't want to be. Back when I had my restaurant - all of 48 seats - David Letterman was at a table for two on a busy Saturday evening and we didn't realize it until he was leaving.

3. Someone with general food writing experience and the resultant insight about food and restaurants has to be preferable to a publication than hiring an unknown quantity who simply dines out a lot and cooks at home.

I totally reject the premise that a quality food writer has to seek out comps along the way to establish and sustain a food writing career.

Edited March 23, 2008 by Holly Moore (log)

[Fat Guy]

In today's media, that could change with a headline.  Some slow news day, an investigative reporter decides to do an expose on all the free meals given by restaurants to restaurant writers.  That could easily ruin careers.

←

That story has been done, most recently by the Wall Street Journal ("The Price of a Four-Star Rating"), and it didn't affect anything as far as I know.

[Holly Moore]

In today's media, that could change with a headline.  Some slow news day, an investigative reporter decides to do an expose on all the free meals given by restaurants to restaurant writers.  That could easily ruin careers.

←

That story has been done, most recently by the Wall Street Journal ("The Price of a Four-Star Rating"), and it didn't affect anything as far as I know.

←

Isn't the Wall Street Journal article about bloggers and forum participants as opposed to professional media?

This is upsetting, though.

Ms. Freeman is one of a growing number of bloggers who have crossed the line into print media. In August, the New York Daily News hired her as its new restaurant critic. She says she stopped taking free meals before getting the new job to give her reviews more credibility.

[Fat Guy]

So, I don't know how it works in Miami, Philadelphia or Tel Aviv, but let me just try to paint a picture of how it works in New York City. Maybe this will help provide some context.

Most every major restaurant opening in New York City follows a predictable pattern. There are a few exceptions every year, but this is the standard procedure. The restaurant either hires a PR firm or is part of a restaurant group that has in-house PR capacity. As the project takes shape, the publicist tries to buy elite media coverage by granting an exclusive. For example, the New York Times will be given the information first in exchange for Wednesday dining-section coverage, then it will be announced to other media. Or New York Magazine will get it. It depends. The top publications will often refuse to preview restaurants unless they're given exclusives.

As the restaurant nears opening, the publicist works the media to try to drum up interest in various kinds of coverage. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. It mostly depends on the chef's level of celebrity.

When there's finally a restaurant in place and food is being prepared in the kitchen, a few things usually happen: first, there will be a preview week or so when some media get invited in; second, there will be an opening party; third, once the place is open, there will be "press dinners," which means media get invited in and eat dinner during the restaurant's normal service. Of course all of this is comped.

Now, we can make that list, as suggested above, of the most journalistically reliable publications in this market that cover food. And I assure you that I can go down that list and testify that I have repeatedly seen writers for every one of those publications at previews, at opening parties and at press dinners. The New York Times? Sure. New York Magazine? Of course. Gourmet? Yep.

To be sure, I never see Frank Bruni at such events. The New York Times has the luxury of a large food-writing team, so it can have it both ways: the Times can turn a blind eye while most of its food writers go out and hobnob with industry people, but can make high-handed moral claims because Frank Bruni himself remains cloistered. Of course the Times still accepts restaurant advertising, but no matter. Because Frank Bruni doesn't take comps and dines anonymously (not really, of course), the New York Times is morally superior.

And yet, the restaurant reviews in the New York Times aren't particularly good and Frank Bruni certainly doesn't have the respect of the industry. Restaurant reviewing may indeed be at an all-time low, but that doesn't correlate with reviewers taking comps. At least not in the case of the Times, where restaurant reviewing is at an all-time low even though the reviewer still has a fat expense account.

Meanwhile, the whole system of having a cloistered critic while giving free rein to the rest of your team is something that only works if you have a team. But a freelance food writer or a food blogger is a solo act. That person has to play the role of critic one day and the role of reporter the next day -- not that those role distinctions have much meaning in contemporary food writing.

I have no idea whether I'm a critic/reviewer or not. The categories don't really make sense in the context of the kind of writing I do. A few years ago I did have a regular weekly reviewing gig, but that has not been typical of my "career." At present, I do some restaurant roundup pieces for Crain's New York Business, which are probably the closest things I do to traditional reviews, though they're collections of one-paragraph reviews and the nature of a roundup is that you only include recommended places. Crain's, by the way, reimburses me for those meals. Nice work if you can get it. I also write books about how to get the most out of restaurants, and I assure you my advances aren't large enough to allow me to eschew comps when I visit restaurants in the course of researching my books -- then again there aren't any reviews in those books. I post many, many restaurant-meal reports online. Are those reviews? Sometimes I pay for those meals, sometimes I don't. Some of the time when I don't pay, it's because someone else paid (a publication, a friend, my mother) and sometimes it's because the restaurant comped the meal. If the meal was comped, I say so. (Does the New York Times disclose every comp its critics get? No.) If anybody is offended enough by the comp to disregard what I have to say, that's his or her choice.

[slkinsey]

I sometimes have to wonder whether reimbursed salaried food old-media writers focus on this aspect of their craft because it is one of the few remaining advantages they have over their new-media peers.

So now we finally get to the REAL heart of your argument, SK. Perhaps it is not comped meal vs. paid meal that matters to you, really; or having ethical doubts (or not) about receiving comped meals, etc.....But non-paid writer versus "salaried" writer. You seem to be saying that anyone with a computer is as reliable as anyone else with a computer. That is a completely different argument my friend.

And I don't know about NYC, but here in Miami, a free meal is a ticket to a glowing write-up in the 'new-media' (by which I assume you mean bloggers). I'm guessing that probably happens more often than you'd care to believe, even (or perhaps especially), in New York.

Sorry, but that strawman's all your own. I was merely making the dichotomy between freelancers, many of whom could not work without comps -- although some publications do reimburse (albeit often stingily) -- and non-freelancers. Although, now that you mention it, there are plenty of food writers for the web (either avocationally on blogs, professionally on blogs, professionally on "web publications" or professionally for web sites associated with either print or television entities) that I think are a lot better than the usual newspaper and magazine food writers.

Ultimately what I care about is reading something that demonstrates that the writer knows what he's talking about and that sheds some kind of useful and meaningful-to-me light on the restaurant(s) being written about.

[Miami Danny]

I sometimes have to wonder whether reimbursed salaried food old-media writers focus on this aspect of their craft because it is one of the few remaining advantages they have over their new-media peers.

So now we finally get to the REAL heart of your argument, SK. Perhaps it is not comped meal vs. paid meal that matters to you, really; or having ethical doubts (or not) about receiving comped meals, etc.....But non-paid writer versus "salaried" writer. You seem to be saying that anyone with a computer is as reliable as anyone else with a computer. That is a completely different argument my friend.

And I don't know about NYC, but here in Miami, a free meal is a ticket to a glowing write-up in the 'new-media' (by which I assume you mean bloggers). I'm guessing that probably happens more often than you'd care to believe, even (or perhaps especially), in New York.

Sorry, but that strawman's all your own. I was merely making the dichotomy between freelancers, many of whom could not work without comps -- although some publications do reimburse (albeit often stingily) -- and non-freelancers. Although, now that you mention it, there are plenty of food writers for the web (either avocationally on blogs, professionally on blogs, professionally on "web publications" or professionally for web sites associated with either print or television entities) that I think are a lot better than the usual newspaper and magazine food writers.

Ultimately what I care about is reading something that demonstrates that the writer knows what he's talking about and that sheds some kind of useful and meaningful-to-me light on the restaurant(s) being written about.

←

If, as you say, "Ultimately what I care about is reading something that demonstrates that the writer knows what he's talking about and that sheds some kind of useful and meaningful-to-me light on the restaurant(s) being written about...", and you don't care what sort of shenanigans went on to bring you to that point, that is certainly your prerogative, and ends the discussion.

Additionally, I'm not sure who you are specifically referring to, of course, but I can tell you that I don't accept free meals. I write for a magazine, a print weekly, and a pretty huge website Miami.com , as well as my own blog. That's new AND old. And no one pays for my meals, not even a single taco. When the sh*t hits the fan, no one can impugn my integrity.

Edited March 23, 2008 by Miami Danny (log)

[slkinsey]

Good for you, Danny. But, I suspect this may be because possible for you to do this work because you are not making a living with food writing, and also I suspect this is affordable for you because most of your food writing is in "cheapeats" -- it's a lot easier to foot your own bill if you're writing about food trucks or $11 paella than if you're writing about 3-star restaurants. How much writing do you do on restaurants that cost North of $200 for a complete experience?

But, you know, maybe you've got a point there. Can a critic really be above-board in his evaluations when he's not footing the bill himself? How can we trust whether the critic really feels the restaurant experience is worth unless he pays for it out of his own pocket? Maybe Frank Bruni should be paying for all those meals, then we'd know no one can impugn his integrity when the "who paid for this" sh*t hits the fan. Of course, there may be plenty of other, perhaps more important reasons a critic's integrity can be questioned, but at least we'd know everyone's got that particular one locked away.

[Fat Guy]

There's actually one British food critic, Michael Winner of the Sunday Times, who personally foots the bill for all his meals. Although, he doesn't make his living from food writing either. He's a film producer and director, and I think he comes from money to boot.

[slkinsey]

If, as you say, "Ultimately what I care about is reading something that demonstrates that the writer knows what he's talking about and that sheds some kind of useful and meaningful-to-me light on the restaurant(s) being written about...", and you don't care what sort of shenanigans went on to bring you to that point, that is certainly your prerogative, and ends the discussion.

I guess I should follow up on the "shenanigans" bit. . .

My feeling is that a good, ethical reviewer is able to mitigate any potential sources of influence to the greatest extent possible and still produce a reasonably unbiased report. In some ways, I think it's easier for a comped and non-anonymous author to do this, because he already assumes that he's getting special treatment, whereas the supposedly anonymous writer dining out on the company dime may not.

But, really, the proof is in the pudding: If a writer is unduly influenced by being comped and other "shenanigans" then this will come out in his writing, which won't reflect a fair and accurate assessment of the restaurant, and therefore won't be very high in quality. And so that's not a writer whose work I will value very highly.

I don't doubt you when you say that a free meal in Miami is a ticket to a glowing blog entry. You're certainly in a better position to know than I about Miami. And it may be true to a certain extent in New York as well. We all know that there are certain bloggers or freelancer/bloggers who always seem to give a positive review. Probably these writers are unduly influenced by being comped, not to mention any number of other things. This, to me, says that they're not very skilled at their jobs. I don't care about their work, because it is not shedding any useful and meaningful-to-me light on the restaurants those writers review. Of course, its also the case that I can say the same thing about several reimbursed writers working for newspapers in this town. So, if I consider the fact that the acceptance or non-acceptance of comps doesn't seem to have a meaningful impact on the usefulness, accuracy and overall quality of restaurant reviews in New York City (else the quality of the reimbursed-meal work would stand head and shoulders above the comped-meal work), and in further consideration of the fact that some of the best, most useful, informative and critical work around NYC of which I am aware has been turned in by writers to accept the occasional comp, what am I to conclude? Are comps ruining the craft of food reviewing? Not as far as I can tell. If all these writers were to follow Holly's model or your model, I guess we'd have three or four reimbursed restaurant reviewers in NYC turning out mostly mediocre work, and then either lots of reviews of hot dogs, pizza and cubano sandwiches or a glut of non-restaurant food writing. Meanwhile, no one would (except enthusiasts with deep pockets) be getting any experience in either dining at or writing critically about restaurants in the middlebrow and higher category.

[Miami Danny]

If, as you say, "Ultimately what I care about is reading something that demonstrates that the writer knows what he's talking about and that sheds some kind of useful and meaningful-to-me light on the restaurant(s) being written about...", and you don't care what sort of shenanigans went on to bring you to that point, that is certainly your prerogative, and ends the discussion.

I guess I should follow up on the "shenanigans" bit. . .

My feeling is that a good, ethical reviewer is able to mitigate any potential sources of influence to the greatest extent possible and still produce a reasonably unbiased report. In some ways, I think it's easier for a comped and non-anonymous author to do this, because he already assumes that he's getting special treatment, whereas the supposedly anonymous writer dining out on the company dime may not.

But, really, the proof is in the pudding: If a writer is unduly influenced by being comped and other "shenanigans" then this will come out in his writing, which won't reflect a fair and accurate assessment of the restaurant, and therefore won't be very high in quality. And so that's not a writer whose work I will value very highly.

I don't doubt you when you say that a free meal in Miami is a ticket to a glowing blog entry. You're certainly in a better position to know than I about Miami. And it may be true to a certain extent in New York as well. We all know that there are certain bloggers or freelancer/bloggers who always seem to give a positive review. Probably these writers are unduly influenced by being comped, not to mention any number of other things. This, to me, says that they're not very skilled at their jobs. I don't care about their work, because it is not shedding any useful and meaningful-to-me light on the restaurants those writers review. Of course, its also the case that I can say the same thing about several reimbursed writers working for newspapers in this town. So, if I consider the fact that the acceptance or non-acceptance of comps doesn't seem to have a meaningful impact on the usefulness, accuracy and overall quality of restaurant reviews in New York City (else the quality of the reimbursed-meal work would stand head and shoulders above the comped-meal work), and in further consideration of the fact that some of the best, most useful, informative and critical work around NYC of which I am aware has been turned in by writers to accept the occasional comp, what am I to conclude? Are comps ruining the craft of food reviewing? Not as far as I can tell. If all these writers were to follow Holly's model or your model, I guess we'd have three or four reimbursed restaurant reviewers in NYC turning out mostly mediocre work, and then either lots of reviews of hot dogs, pizza and cubano sandwiches or a glut of non-restaurant food writing. Meanwhile, no one would (except enthusiasts with deep pockets) be getting any experience in either dining at or writing critically about restaurants in the middlebrow and higher category.

←

You know, I agree with you on a certain level, especially when it comes to more expensive meals. No one reimburses me, and my natural tendency is to write more about less expensive places anyway, so that is what most of my work consists of (although I have written several fine-dining reviews-at places I was planning on eating at anyway, for the most part).

And I also realized that I have been to many wine tastings where the wines were provided by wineries or distributors. Some wines were great, some were not so great. Some events were open to the public, but some were trade/press only. As a bar owner, I always voted with my ordering pen, and didn't feel the need to criticize the lesser wines. You knew what I liked, because they were on my list. But now, as a writer, I try to include the good and the bad. But it's hard to arrange a tasting of 100 wines from Montalcino without the help of the wineries or distributors. "How much do I owe you for that tasting?" just doesn't seem right. So perhaps you have a point.

[Holly Moore]

Perhaps there are sorta ok comps and not ok comps.

Sorta OK comps -

Restaurateur originated with no defined quid pro quo. examples: opening parties, benefits, supplier sponsored tastings, guest chefs, meals offered while a writer is at a restaurant to do a feature other than a review.

Not OK comps -

Writer originated with a specific quid pro quo. I'd like to write about your restaurant, but I expect you to feed me in the process. I'd like to write about your restaurant but I can't afford it so you will need to give me my meal.

Restaurateur originated with an expected quid pro quo. Be our guest for dinner so you can write about us or review us.

[slkinsey]

Danny: I think we all agree that, at least for the sake of appearances if nothing else, it's ideal if the writer is reimbursed (or pays out of his own pocket). But really, if a writer is going to allow his ethics to be swayed to the extent that he goes easy on a place or turns in an undeserved glowing review of a place simply as the result of accepting a press comp. . . how ethical is that writer going to be anyway? How good is his work going to be anyway? Would that writer's work be meaningfully better, or meaningfully more ethical if the comp were removed? I'm inclined to believe that there would simply be other forms of potential influence and ethical conflict that would sway this writer's work in one direction or the other, and the quality would remain low.

Edited March 23, 2008 by slkinsey (log)

[slkinsey]

Holly: What about if a restaurant comps the writer a meal, with the expectation that there is likely to be a review, and the writer replies: "I am happy to come and experience your restaurant, but I hope you understand that I can't pull any punches if I write about your place, and I can't make any guarantees that I'll find space in my column."

ETA: I do agree that it's not right for a writer to approach a restaurant and demand comps.

Edited March 23, 2008 by slkinsey (log)

[Holly Moore]

What about if a restaurant comps the writer a meal, with the expectation that there is likely to be a review, and the writer replies: "I am happy to come and experience your restaurant, but I hope you understand that I can't pull any punches if I write about your place, and I can't make any guarantees that I'll find space in my column."

←

From above:

Restaurateur originated with an expected quid pro quo. Be our guest for dinner so you can write about us or review us.

I'd suggest that if a critic gets a reputation for accepting comps and then not giving a place the benefit of the doubt the lesson learned will be to not comp that critic.

Edited March 23, 2008 by Holly Moore (log)

[slkinsey]

I don't think it takes too many negative reviews following comped meals for the restaurant community to pick up on the idea that a comp doesn't guarantee special treatment from a certain writer. But, if the writer is good enough, fair enough and/or influential enough, and/or if they want reviews badly enough, and/or they have enough confidence in the quality of their restaurant, they'll take the risk anyway. This is exactly the relationship opera and theater companies have with the critics they comp.

[slkinsey]

I'd suggest that if a critic gets a reputation for accepting comps and then not giving a place the benefit of the doubt the lesson learned will be to not comp that critic.

I'm not sure I agree. Certainly this would be true with respect to a critic that is overwhelmingly and universally negative (and they do exist). I can't believe than any restaurant ever likes to see this guy. But a critic who has been known to be positive and supportive of the places/things he likes and critical of the places/things he doesn't like, but overall balanced and fair, would likely still continue to be comped. I suppose the one concession a comped writer might need to make would be if the meal was truly horrible, he might go back to the restaurateur and say, "I have to hope that the kitchen was having an off night, because that was terrible. If you want to invite me back later, I'd be willing to give it another try before doing my writeup." This, frankly, is something I would hope that a responsible reimbursed food writer would also do. Otherwise, there are always some good things and some bad things to write about most any restaurant. "Benefit of the doubt" doesn't equal "overall positive review" -- and, Brit reviewers notwithstanding, a place really has to stink to get a shellacking.

[Daniel Rogov]

I cannot resist. Following is a link to a crit I wrote just last week about a restaurant in a hi-tech area near Ben Gurion Airport in Israel. Although I write about a single meal, I actually attended twice with precisely the same results. After all I have said until now it should go without saying that my dining-out budget from the newspaper covered the cost of my meals completely.

The day the review appeared I received an email from the owner of the restaurant to the effect that: "It was not easy or rewarding to read your review this morning but because we know and recognize your professionalism we appreciate your comments and will most surely take them into consideration". I plan to return again in 4-6 months. If no changes, no further review will be necessary. If major improvement, it will be my pleasure to re-review the restaurant.

Here's the link: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966462.html

[slkinsey]

I'm curious: Who paid for all the wines you reviewed in "Rogov's Guide to Israeli Wines"? Was it you, or your publisher?

Edited March 24, 2008 by slkinsey (log)

[Daniel Rogov]

I'm curious:  Who paid for all the wines you reviewed in "Rogov's Guide to Israeli Wines"?  Was it you, or your publisher?

←

Sure as all get out it was not me. I never was and never will be wealthy enough for that.

Not putting you off but just returned from the Golan Heights, its almost 1 in the morning and tomorrow I'm going to be starting a new thread relating to how wine critics obtain wines for tasting. Does tie in with the comping of meals, so will (with permission from the administrators) post the thread on this part of the egullet forum.

[Holly Moore]

Daniel, you are probably one of the few restaurant critics that merits hazardous duty pay.