Let writers go gaga about us and we will succeed
When examining the concept of word-of-mouth advertising, the words “Let our guests speak well about us, and we’ll succeed “is a profound endorsement that the consumers acceptance impacts positively on the restaurant operation. Lately however and especially in the world of dining, this endorsement has morphed into “Let writers go gaga about us and we will succeed.”
Opening my local daily newspaper, I came across the section where several writers had published their observations of recent personal visits to local restaurants. The reviewers described the food they tasted in ecstatic terms such as, “divine”, “spectacular”,” absolutely scrumptious”, “amazing flavours”, “delightfully mouth watering”, “out of this world”,” a dish to die for”, “flavour bomb” etc. Extraordinarily, as I read the reviews to the very end, I got the impression that every food item served to the writer was so good; it would be the envy of Joël Robuchon, who with 31 stars - is the world’s most decorated Michelin star chef.
Let’s examine the review process itself. An activity, that continues to be one of eternal discussion as to the credibility and reliability of the written review and the reviewer himself/herself. One thing is for certain: while a less-than-truthful good review may fill restaurant tables for the days immediately following the published review it will not be sustained for long. A purportedly good review may fool some of the public but not for long! What’s more, if the written review is of little substance and credibility, these writers seriously damage the credibility of legitimate restaurant reviewers as a whole. A quasi-critic can drive some customers into a restaurant once or twice, but that alone cannot guarantee the restaurant success.
In 2010, Food writer Josh Ozersky married Danit Lidor. The wedding reception took place at the rooftop of the Empire Hotel in Manhattan. The more than 100 guests enjoyed a wide array of food made by chefs from several well known restaurants. Mr Ozersky was so pleased with the event that he devoted his 15th June column on Time Magazine’s website to it, recommending that other couples turn to these restaurant chefs for their own weddings, whilst dismissing most caterers as “not good cooks.”
What Josh Ozersky failed to mention was that he had not paid a cent for the food including the five-tier cake or the venue. Readers might not be faulted when making the assumption that Mr Ozersky promised these chefs, many of whom did high end catering and earned hefty bucks, that he would mention them in the magazine column in exchange for the ‘freebies’. What it also started was a debate about the widespread and longstanding practice in some newspaper circles of trading “comp”, i.e. free meals and drinks – in return for image boosting coverage. Many believe that taking this route is akin to bribery.
Good restaurant reviewing is good journalism. Reviewers should subscribe to the same accepted standards of professional responsibility as other journalists. The true goal of reviewing the restaurant is to experience the restaurant just as an ordinary patron. If the dining session is pre-arranged with arrival pre-announced and the reviewer receiving the hospitality of the restaurant and a free meal… then the legitimacy of the review is very questionable. Seriously, it’s impossible to write an objective review if your received an array of free food. Regrettably no one discloses the fact that they have received something in return for their positive coverage.
A well known reviewer once revealed that he receives heaps of invitations from restaurants. When he mentions that his write up will include the good, the not so good and the ugly…90% of the restaurateurs who contacted him, stop calling.
My take on this is that food writers who work for traditional media publications including newspapers should not accept free meals and beverages in exchange for a “favourable “review.
Shafeek Wahab – Editor, Hospitality Sri Lanka, Consultant, Trainer, Ex-Hotelier
|
|
|
|
