Bergen Record Restaurant Reviews

[tommy]

Do you like asking yourself questions and then answering yourself?  I guess you do.

hehe.

[rozrapp]

ngatti Posted on May 26 2002,23:50

I've always thought that the Times gives short shrift to Northeast New Jersey (Ridgewood excepted)... For a while there it seemed that everyplace they reviewed was in the Princeton or Redbank areas.  I guess that's where the new and exciting restaurants are.

Funny, I have had exactly the opposite reaction -- that most of the restaurants reviewed in the Times are in the northern part of the state, with the reviewers giving short shrift to the rest of the state, including my area of south central NJ where Red Bank is located.  

True, Red Bank has become something of a restaurant "scene" during the past couple of years.  But with a very few exceptions, "exciting" isn't exactly the adjective I would choose to describe them.

[ngatti]

does anyone read previous posts before posting?  i gotta wonder.

Sorry Tommy.  But you made such excellent points that i thought you'd be well served if I repeated 'em

Nick

[ngatti]

that most of the restaurants reviewed in the Times are in the northern part of the state

I don't get out much   South of I-80, I get nosebleed, west of GSP...  Oh yeah!  West of GSP is Ridgewood!      Is that considered North ?

Nick  

[tommy]

does anyone read previous posts before posting?  i gotta wonder.

Sorry Tommy.  But you made such excellent points that i thought you'd be well served if I repeated 'em

Nick

nick, my comment wasn't directed towards you.  it was more of a general thing.  but thanks for reiterating.  

[Liz Johnson]

sorry... computer problems

[Liz Johnson]

Just for the record   the NYT readers who live in Rockland get the NJ section, and it's very rare that they see a review from their own county. Occasionally a Rockland review will appear in the Westchester section, and there's a good chance Rocklanders will never see it at all.

(I live in Nyack.)

[Liz Johnson]

ditto

[Liz Johnson]

I'm so sorry. I was having a network delay, I think.

[Rail Paul]

OK, liztowns, that resolves that issue. I didn't know if the readers in Rockland get their own edition, so the occasional Rockland review makes sense...

[dodge621]

HERE we go again. Why would the Record put a review of a restaurant and give it a half star.  In No way am I saying the Record should inflate reviews, rather if a restaurant sucks then simply go to another restaurant where the food is edible and readers may enjoy going.

ALso the review gave me NO indication that the reviewere ate at the restaurant more than once, as they say they do.

[Rail Paul]

I'll differ with you on this one, Dodge.

If the reviewer doesn't like the joint, she should say so. In star systems, a half star (or no star) should convey the lack of enthusiasm discussed in the narrative. I don't think the restaurant should get a free pass (no review) if it really blows. Of course, that would irritate the advertising sales department, of which the reviewer is usually very aware

(Then, there't the "hated this, found that to be charred, service was slow" but three stars anyway review. That's a different post.)

[dodge621]

I agree if it was no good it should be in the paper and detailed as it was so we do not waste our time there. However, I personally enjoy finding out about new places to dine and find it hard to so from the Record.

[tommy]

I agree if it was no good it should be in the paper and detailed as it was so we do not waste our time there.

you said the exact opposite in your previous post.

i would suggest using other resources if you are interested in finding decent places.  certainly a board like this is a good place to start.  the bergen record hardly rates when it comes to restaurant reviewing.

[dodge621]

My comment "I agree" was to acknowledge Rail Paul's opinion.

[msp]

To respond to one recent comment: the reviewers are freelance and know nothing about the advertising practices of the paper.

And if the idea of a review is to report on the experience the reader is likely to have when visiting any particular restaurant--- well, I would want to know before I plunk down my money that the reviewer had this awful meal...so I wont waste my money! Isnt the reason we read reviews to make decisions on where to dine? If so, we also decide where NOT to dine...thus, reviews about bombs.

[ngatti]

To respond to one recent comment: the reviewers are freelance and know nothing about the advertising practices of the paper.

This sounds like someone who knows something of the editorial practices of 'The Record'.  If you have a connection I think it only fair that you out yourself.  Otherwise I'm going to think that 'msp' = Marge Perry.

well, I would want to know before I plunk down my money that the reviewer had this awful meal...so I wont waste my money! Isnt the reason we read reviews to make decisions on where to dine? If so, we also decide where NOT to dine...thus, reviews about bombs.

Whoa!, Generally your argument is valid, BUT in this particular case, with this particular restaurant, this argument is slightly specious.  I think dodge raised an important point in his original post.  If I read it correctly (and dodge'll be sure to jump in if I didn't ), dodge was commenting more or less on why 'Binghamton' ?  If you live within a 20 mile radius of the place and know anything about the area's restaurant or food scene (even a little bit) then Rene Mack's review begs the question: 'why don't you tell us something we don't already know?'  I mean if Rene Mack wanted to see if the place still warranted its hash house rep then fine, visit it.  If it changed for the better then that's news of the man bites dog variety and deserves review space.  But it obviously didn't.  So why write one at all.  We already know the place sucks and it would be disingenuous for Rene Mack to think that the dining public doesn't have a clue as to how bad this place really is.  

What the review gave others and myself was the impression that Rene Mack is pretty mean spirited.  Kinda like :

"I know the place is bad, the dining public knows the place is bad, but I'm gonna kick the guy while he's down anyway, it'll make good copy.  Besides I haven't written a good asshole ripper in a while and this is just the place to practice on."  

I agree with dodge on this one.  I thought the review unecessary.  The public would have been better served if Rene Mack  had found a restaurant with a GOOD rep and THEN found something to complain about.  I always thought restaurants were reviewd because the reviewers heard some buzz about a place and decide to investigate. Then the reviews good bad or indifferent serve the readership.

This particular review was merely gratuitous and served no one.

Rant over

Your mileage may vary

Nick

[Rail Paul]

Several local newspapers have multiple pages of restaurant advertising. The reviewer has several restaurants on which she can write, each review will convey value to the reader.

Choice 1 - slam the dump, get a torrent on nasty complaints piled on your editor (guy who signs your voucher) by the ad sales staff when the dump cancels its box ad.

Choice 2 - write about that nice, interesting place down the road. Introduce the readers to a place they might enjoy. Maybe the ad guy can peddle a few inches of box display. Your editor OKs an occasional extra column, and you pick up another $150.

I'm human, I'd take #2 in a heartbeat...and I don't think that's dishonest.  But, it helps to understand the motivation and position of the reviewer.

[dodge621]

I recall seeing Binghamton's ad in the Record in the past.  I guess we should commend the Record for willing to give a bad review of a place that advertises in its paper.

[msp]

Ouch!

Someone asked, after my earlier posting, if msp=Marge Perry, reviewer for The Record. Yup, it's me. And here's the ouch:

Reviewing does not work at all the way you are guessing it to be. I am a freelancer, and my choices for the restaurants I review come from two sources. Either my editor says that a restaurant is up for review (because it hasn't been reviewed for 3 years, or has never been reviewed, or is new) or I see or hear of a restaurant and ask to review it. Plain and simple, and it has nothing at all to do with advertising. I have no knowledge nor interest in who advertises with The Record, and it has no influence on my life or income.

As for your thoughts on what motivates me: I don't "pick up" an extra $150 for writing an occasional extra column my editor approves because I make her life easier. I write the same number of reviews (read: earn the same amount of money) whether I report on a great restaurant or a horrific one.

And here is a further piece of information that may interest you: Restaurant reviewing, compared to my other sources of income, is an extremely low paying job. For the hours I spend visiting a restaurant (always twice, in response to an earlier query) and making my follow-up call, then doing the actual writing...the compensation is far below what I make in other areas of my work.

Ok, time to address another point raised in this thread: While the people on this site are all affirmed foodies and very aware that the Binghamton (which I did not review) doesn't have much to offer in terms of food service, many readers of the paper may not be aware of that...think of people new to our area, or generally not knowledgable about the restaurant scene who may see it all lit up at night and wonder. The purpose of reviews is to inform readers about the experience they can expect when spending their money at a restaurant. To the reader curious about a restaurant we food savvy people  know to be less than adaquate, a review of the place offers an important service.

How much would you trust as a source for reviews a newspaper which only reports on restaurants they like? Clearly, the reviewers were pre-disposed to like the restaurant before they even reviewed it!

One final note. Many people think reviewing is about finding fault and pointing out weaknesses. I believe that is absolutely not our job. I do not walk in to a restaurant looking for mistakes, looking for oversalting, long waits, dry fish, or any other problems. I go to a restaurant armed only with the need to observe and report. Frankly, I love finding restaurants who do their job well, who are passionate and enthralled and good managers.

I want to make it clear the thoughts expressed here are mine alone, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Record or any other media with which I am involved.

[Rosie]

Marge, Thank you so much for your informative post.

[dodge621]

[think of people new to our area, or generally not knowledgable about the restaurant scene who may see it all lit up at night and wonder]

Marge, if you are thinking of people new to our area, why are reviewing restaurants in Westchester County?  Seems like you wanted to go to Xavier's so you had the Record pay the bill and you reviewed it.  Your review is largely self-serving (admittingly there are some in Bergen who may enjoy the review, but the majority could not care less about a place in Westchester)  Do not try to tell me you you reviewed this restaurant for the people new to our area.  Nice try.

[tommy]

Do not try to tell me you you reviewed this [xavier's]restaurant for the people new to our area.  Nice try.

i don't think marge was suggesting that.  

one might conclude from the constant bashing of the bergen record that there is an agenda here, or even an axe to grind.

[msp]

The Xaviers restaurants are an important part of our region's culinary scene, and I believe the Xaviers In Garrison (the first one) is an important part of the best of dining in our region. It is a destination restaurant for many of us, certainly a place (as I believe I pointed out) that would be ideal for "special ocassion" dining for residents of Bergen County.

The Garrison Xavier's is, in fact, a destination restaurant for the majority of diners who go there: there is only a very small population in the immediate area who dine there. And even if you live around the corner, the restaurant is not the sort of place you'd go to on a regular basis.

Living in Bergen County, this restaurant is the sort of place one might go for Mother's Day, a marriage proposal, an anniversary, a special birthday, and the like.

Haven't you ever wondered what special place you could go to on such an occasion?

[Rachel Perlow]

Ok, time to address another point raised in this thread: While the people on this site are all affirmed foodies and very aware that the Binghamton (which I did not review) doesn't have much to offer in terms of food service, many readers of the paper may not be aware of that...think of people new to our area, or generally not knowledgable about the restaurant scene who may see it all lit up at night and wonder. The purpose of reviews is to inform readers about the experience they can expect when spending their money at a restaurant. To the reader curious about a restaurant we food savvy people  know to be less than adaquate, a review of the place offers an important service.

I hadn't thought of it in that light. When we first moved to Bergen county, I wondered about Binghamtons. More than one local told me not to bother, but it would have been good to see a review in the newspaper too.

Regarding reviewing NY places, like Xaviar's, to me it is acceptable occasionally. I don't know if the review in question was focusing on the Garrison or Piermont location, but since Piermont is a shorter drive from where I live then Mahwah, for example, it is useful for me to have Piermont & Nyack (which are definitely worthy destinations) restaurants in the paper. Then again, I am not a print subscriber and usually don't read reviews other than online when they are mentioned here, or if I am doing research for a particular restaurant or type of restaurant I'll look to see if there's a review online.