Restaurant Reviews?

[TarteTatin]

We recently wrote about a good restaurant that had an off night.

The owner read the review and contacted our friends who had made the reservation. He offered apologies and a free dinner. Our friends then read what we had written on eGullet and were upset about what we wrote.

Our friends think because of the nature of the internet, a negative review could seriously damage a previously well reviewed restaurant. Despite disclaimers within our review that previous experiences had been good, and that perhaps the restaurant was having an off night, they didn't think that posting on eGullet or an emailed/internet review was the answer. They thought we should have contacted the owner directly.

We tried to explain to them that eGullet is a discussion board, and that the people who post here understand the nature of bad and GOOD reviews, and that not everyone has the same experience at a restaurant. We also tried to explain that a bad review within a thread does not necessarily mean that the restaurant should be avoided, and that most people who read and post on eGullet do indeed read the entire thread before drawing conclusions about any particular restaurant.

Their point of of view, not really knowing much about eGullet, was that this thread with a negative review "would be there forever" and could irreparably damage the restaurant.

eGullet's motto is "eat, chew, discuss".

We're not sure why our friends are upset with us (we presented the facts as they were). Do they not understand eGullet, having not been on it much before? Are we wrong in our assumption that we should relate our experiences? The week after, we wrote a glowing review about someplace else, where we had a super time. So we all write positive and negative reviews... Isn't that what eGullet is all about?

[Ohba]

Do they not understand eGullet, having not been on it much before?

←

It sounds like they don't even understand the freedom to express an opinion.

[Dave Hatfield]

Tell it like it is!

To friends & restauranteurs; "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen."

[Kent Wang]

A bad review will "be there forever" in the same way that the bad experience will. You can't go back in time to correct a bad experience for a customer. A bad experience is going to damage your restaurant just as a bad review will. The solution? Prevent as many bad experiences as possible and the reviews will reflect that. Sounds like a good system to me.

[gfron1]

To me it is the same as people thinking that Bill Gates is going to send them $100 for every person they forward that stupid email to. If your friends aren't willing or able to click more than once then they'll always have 1% of the information.

I don't know which review you're referring to, but it sounds like the review was fair and accurate - for the meal that you had.

[Chris Amirault]

We're not sure why our friends are upset with us (we presented the facts as they were). Do they not understand eGullet, having not been on it much before? Are we wrong in our assumption that we should relate our experiences?

←

I'd suggest that you ask them these questions and report back!

[docsconz]

I think all reviews are reasonable so long as they are done fairly and without malice. Personally, I tend to write reports that accentuate the positive unless I feel that the "bad" was particularly noteworthy. For instance, if I have a meal at a restaurant that is not in keeping with the general tenor of the reputation of the restaurant, chef or restauranteur or my expectations based upon other reports here, I will report it. I wil never write a bad or a glowing report about a restaurant that I did not honestly feel deserved it.

[H. du Bois]

If I were to make a guess, I'd guess that the heart of what upset them is that what you'd written was associated with them, whether you intended it to be or not. After all, it was they who the owner contacted, not you. Not that I think that anyone is at fault here - I just think this came utterly out of left field for them. And if they had a different opinion than you did, or if they are people who are uncomfortable sharing opinions in a public forum, then this might be a very awkward situation for them.

[docsconz]

If I were to make a guess, I'd guess that the heart of what upset them is that what you'd written was associated with them, whether you intended it to be or not.  After all, it was they who the owner contacted, not you.  Not that I think that anyone is at fault here - I just think this came utterly out of left field for them.  And if they had a different opinion than you did, or if they are people who are uncomfortable sharing opinions in a public forum, then this might be a very awkward situation for them.

←

This is a very good point. While you certainly have the right to write whatever you did, the fact that your friends made the reservation meant that they were associated with you and now with your opinion, which they may or may not have shared. This can be a sensitive issue, especially if the place is one your friends are fond of and may have an association with.

[jenc]

Also, for them to have been identified off of the review might have distrubed them more than anything else. Did you name them by name? Maybe you could remove that, though verbally, they seem to be more concerned with the bad review. And I think that's a silly thing to get knickers in a knot over. It's your opinion and you're more than allowed to have one!

[TarteTatin]

You make good points, H. Dubois and Dosconz...our friends were associated with the review and didn't want to be, since they are acquaintances with the owner (only because they eat there occasionally).

No, I did not identify them in the review. I think what must have happened, is that the owner read the review, and they must have deduced which table had those specific problems, and went back to their reservation book and called from that.

Meanwhile, our friends receive this phone call out of the blue, offering them a free dinner, and it's out of left field.

Also, I think our review was not at all scathing. Just stating the facts of some things that happened during the evening, and I noted quite a few times that we like this restaurant, and they must have been having an off night.

Needless to say, our friends only saw it as a complete bad review, and when they explained how upset they were to us, I asked them if they saw how I complimented numerous things...but they didn't read those parts, or something.

I wish I could show them this thread. But then they'd be even more upset that I was sharing on a public forum with others!

[Daniel]

TarteTatin,.

They have to be upset because they were contacted and didnt necessarily agree with your post.. So, they should refuse the free meal if they dont think anything was wrong and give the owner back his money..

In fact, whats there phone number, I will call them and try to iron out the situation..

[Vadouvan]

Tartetatin i will give you 2 answers.

1. Generally Broad

2. Specific.

1. E-gullet is indeed a discussion board and people are free to write about honest experiences.

If the restauranteur in question (whom I know personally) reads e gullet often enough to act on your review, then CLEARLY he gives the forum enough credence to take it seriously and not write you off as some disgruntled crackpot. Thus your "friends" need to chill.

2. I read the specific review of your dinner and I think you need better dining partners.

Not to insult you or your friends but this is the same dinner where..

Your Waitperson shook and over fizzed your champagne with no apology or wipe

Spilled your amuse bouche on you

and served you a foie gras torchon with the plastic wrapping STILL around it......

among other issues....and they found absolutely nothing wrong with it ?

Are you kidding me ?

Without giving it away and thus adding fuel to the fire, I spend about 4 days a week in your city and I find that as a whole, people in that city put more of a premium on relationships with the restaurant owner than the actual intergrity of the food or service.

Your review was spot on and in my opinon quite generous based on how abysmal your evening sounded.

The only time it is completely inappropriate to write about a bad meal is when said meal is free.

If you are paying for your experiences, you can talk about it, we all work hard for our money.

[david coonce]

TT,

The huge difference between reviews here on egullet and ones in, say the NYT or any other respectable newspaper, is that their reviews are based on several visits to the same restaurant. I don't know how many times Frank Bruni, for example, visits a restaurant, but I have heard it is at least 3 and as many as 5 times, generally with three other dining companions. This is important - it helps to remove the inherent bias of a "bad night," which can happen anywhere, at anytime, and it allows him to sample as much of a restaurant's menu as possible. Of course, your review was based solely on one night at the restaurant. It's an unfair specific night that reflects badly on the restaurant, unbalanced with any return visits to see if the problems had been corrected. That's okay, since you were reviewing it not professionally but for egullet. But you know and I know that the public is easily swayed by the internet. So much of what people see online is gospel. And so a couple looking for a night on the town might google the name of the restaurant you went to, and, just maybe, your review pops up near the top of the matches. Hey, it's on the internet, on a "culinary" website, right? They must know what they're talking about!

You see why the chef might have been upset? The internet has increased the "word of mouth" potential 10 thousandfold. And your review was bad and based on a small sampling size (one night, presumably one entree per diner, etc.) It's not fair to the restaurant. It's also not fair that your bad experience will be taken as the gospel truth by so many, but that's the nature of the internet. Look at how many people fall for Nigerian money-transfer scams etc.

[docsconz]

TT,

The huge difference between reviews here on egullet and ones in, say the NYT or any other respectable newspaper, is that their reviews are based on several visits to the same restaurant. I don't know how many times Frank Bruni, for example, visits a restaurant, but I have heard it is at least 3 and as many as 5 times, generally with three other dining companions. This is important - it helps to remove the inherent bias of a "bad night," which can happen anywhere, at anytime, and it allows him to sample as much of a restaurant's menu as possible.  Of course, your review was based solely on one night at the restaurant. It's an unfair specific night that reflects badly on the restaurant, unbalanced with any return visits to see if the problems had been corrected. That's okay, since you were reviewing it not professionally but for egullet. But you know and I know that the public is easily swayed by the internet. So much of what people see online is gospel. And so a couple looking for a night on the town might google the name of the restaurant you went to, and, just maybe, your review pops up near the top of the matches. Hey, it's on the internet, on a "culinary" website, right? They must know what they're talking about!

You see why the chef might have been upset? The internet has increased the "word of mouth" potential 10 thousandfold. And your review was bad and based on a small sampling size (one night, presumably one entree per diner, etc.) It's not fair to the restaurant. It's also not fair that your bad experience will be taken as the gospel truth by so many, but that's the nature of the internet. Look at how many people fall for Nigerian money-transfer scams etc.

←

A couple of things in defense of TT: first, it was clearly stated that this was not the first and only visit by TT to this restaurant. Second, do you really think Frank Bruni does not mention specific incidents during his reviews?

[ned]

And so a couple looking for a night on the town might google the name of the restaurant you went to, and, just maybe, your review pops up near the top of the matches. Hey, it's on the internet, on a "culinary" website, right? They must know what they're talking about!

←

The world is a dangerous place. Some people think Zagat is a credible resource!! I mean come on.

Here's another thread that obliquely broaches TT's topic:

http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=80814&hl=

And for my own self, I sure hope you post about bad experiences.

[Kent Wang]

But you know and I know that the public is easily swayed by the internet. So much of what people see online is gospel. And so a couple looking for a night on the town might google the name of the restaurant you went to, and, just maybe, your review pops up near the top of the matches. Hey, it's on the internet, on a "culinary" website, right? They must know what they're talking about!

You see why the chef might have been upset? The internet has increased the "word of mouth" potential 10 thousandfold. And your review was bad and based on a small sampling size (one night, presumably one entree per diner, etc.) It's not fair to the restaurant. It's also not fair that your bad experience will be taken as the gospel truth by so many, but that's the nature of the internet. Look at how many people fall for Nigerian money-transfer scams etc.

←

If there is indeed such a sector of the public that is so ignorant and foolish that they will be unduly swayed by a single negative report then that sector probably won't be able to identify good food from bad anyway. In fact, they wouldn't even be on eGullet to begin with, they'd be on CitySearch!

I can't agree with any logic that says that I should dumb down or otherwise alter what I say because someone might misinterpret it.

[Busboy]

TT,

The huge difference between reviews here on egullet and ones in, say the NYT or any other respectable newspaper, is that their reviews are based on several visits to the same restaurant. I don't know how many times Frank Bruni, for example, visits a restaurant, but I have heard it is at least 3 and as many as 5 times, generally with three other dining companions. This is important - it helps to remove the inherent bias of a "bad night," which can happen anywhere, at anytime, and it allows him to sample as much of a restaurant's menu as possible.  Of course, your review was based solely on one night at the restaurant. It's an unfair specific night that reflects badly on the restaurant, unbalanced with any return visits to see if the problems had been corrected. That's okay, since you were reviewing it not professionally but for egullet. But you know and I know that the public is easily swayed by the internet. So much of what people see online is gospel. And so a couple looking for a night on the town might google the name of the restaurant you went to, and, just maybe, your review pops up near the top of the matches. Hey, it's on the internet, on a "culinary" website, right? They must know what they're talking about!

You see why the chef might have been upset? The internet has increased the "word of mouth" potential 10 thousandfold. And your review was bad and based on a small sampling size (one night, presumably one entree per diner, etc.) It's not fair to the restaurant. It's also not fair that your bad experience will be taken as the gospel truth by so many, but that's the nature of the internet. Look at how many people fall for Nigerian money-transfer scams etc.

←

The "off night" thing comes up again and again, here and on other boards, with chefs, lovers, groupies, fans or whomever gets on and criticizes a critical review on the grounds that "it was only one visit," or "it was just an off night."

Until I see a chef, lover, groupie fan or whomever post a similar comment about a positive review "we just got lucky that night," I'm not going to give the "just one night" objection too much thought.

[Chris Amirault]

Great point, Charles.

I was wondering about some of these issues when I wrote this post concerning a new restaurant here in Providence. Even though it had been open only two weeks and I rarely write negatively about restaurants, I felt like the very poor quality of several aspects of the experience, coupled with the restaurant's strong review from the local paper's food editor, merited an honest response.

[david coonce]

I think you miss my point. I wasn't arguing that TT shouldn't share her experiences; indeed, the point of what I was saying is that everyone should say whatever they think about restaurants they dine at, no matter how good or bad. I was just explaining why I think a chef or restaurant might be upset, and how this is a different world than getting a bad review in a newspaper.

And if you don't think people look to egullet for help in dining choices, well, you haven't been paying attention. Look at how many threads on here are basically "traveling to __, need a recommendation." There are hundreds of entries like that on here, at least, if not thousands. Like it or not, eGullet has attained quite a cachet over the years as a place where educated and knowledgeable people congregate to talk about food. It shouldn't surprise that the less-initiated would look to it as a reliable source for dining reviews.

And I don't think it's fair for a restaurant to be judged by its worst night...or its best. Would you want to be remembered for your most embarassing moment? oR your most saint-like? I would guess most restaurants have far more good nights than bad ones. (Or else they wouldn't last too long). But it's the bad ones that people write about.

Edited September 9, 2006 by david coonce (log)

[hjshorter]

I was just explaining why I think a chef or restaurant might be upset, and how this is a different world than getting a bad review in a newspaper.

I would point out that the average Joe is probably getting a more accurate impression of the restaurant on any given night. Many restaurant critics are frequently recognized and treated accordingly.

And I don't think it's fair for a restaurant to be judged by its worst night...or its best.

But I am not charging the public money for my worst nights. At least, not usually.

[Chris Amirault]

And if you don't think people look to egullet for help in dining choices, well, you haven't been paying attention. Look at how many threads on here are basically "traveling to __, need a recommendation." There are hundreds of entries like that on here, at least, if not thousands. Like it or not, eGullet has attained quite a cachet over the years as a place where educated and knowledgeable people congregate to talk about food. It shouldn't surprise that the less-initiated would look to it as a reliable source for dining reviews.

And I don't think it's fair for a restaurant to be judged by its worst night...or its best. Would you want to be remembered for your most embarassing moment? oR your most saint-like? I would guess most restaurants have far more good nights than bad ones. (Or else they wouldn't last too long).  But it's the bad ones that people write about.

←

I think you've got an internal contradiction here. If you look at the hundreds of "Where Should I Eat in X?" topics, the vast, vast majority of those posts are positive recommendations. Sure, there are a few disputes (don't go there; go here), but the example you've chosen disproves your point.

I also think that there are far fewer negative reviews here than your last sentence suggests. Even though the French Laundry, EL Bulli, Del Posto, Alinea topics are battlegrounds about positive and negative reviews, the majority of posts are, I think, positive.

Now, if we start talking about the British restaurant critics, on the other hand....

[Busboy]

My attitude is that a thread like Django, or any of the other "major" restaurants with their own threads, is more or less a mosaic. Any single post is just a small, discrete part of a larger picture and, despite the tendancy to cheerlead that I (a cynic) often detect, a skim through the totality of the posts acts as a way to eliminate the outlier experiences and provide an accurate representation of a place.

Also, it's important to credit readers with enough intelligence and critical savvy to understand the nature of a forum like this. To assume that a restaurant will be harmed because of a single critical post amongst a cascade of glowing reviews assumes, I think, that the reader is not as bright as we are and can't understand the context of a post. It feels condescendingto me.

[hjshorter]

Does anyone else think that the restaurant owner was out of line going through the books, then calling out of the blue? I found that I little strange. Yes, it's good to be proactive, but...

[Ohba]

And if you don't think people look to egullet for help in dining choices, well, you haven't been paying attention. Look at how many threads on here are basically "traveling to __, need a recommendation." There are hundreds of entries like that on here, at least, if not thousands. Like it or not, eGullet has attained quite a cachet over the years as a place where educated and knowledgeable people congregate to talk about food. It shouldn't surprise that the less-initiated would look to it as a reliable source for dining reviews.

←

True enough. But I bet I'm not alone in having learned over the years that two things you will never get definitive and reliable information on, whether from knowledgeable friends or published reviews, are films and restaurants. Reviews and recommendations can be a rough guide and an interesting read, but at some point you just have to follow your own judgement.