27 replies to this topic

[mdt]

I know there's a media dinner coming up, and I would highly advise the media to come here when it's crowded, on their own dime, before raving about the great meal they had.

And by media do you mean blogging community too? Aren't the media dinners put on for PR? You rarely, if ever, hear anything negative from those that attend.

[DonRocks]

And by media do you mean blogging community too? Aren't the media dinners put on for PR? You rarely, if ever, hear anything negative from those that attend.

I'm not sure (I've seen the invitation, but not the recipients list), but I cannot fault the restaurant for wanting to get the word out about their new chef, who has a relatively strong pedigree. Nor can I fault the media (which may include bloggers) for wanting to become familiar with the chef and the menu.

I guess what I can fault is the potential for loading up on a free meal, which will surely be the restaurant's best effort, and unequivocally raving about it without appropriate disclaimers.

This is such a widespread phenomenon that it merits its own thread (and please note that I'm leaving the name of the restaurant out because I don't think they're doing anything wrong).

[Waitman]

I think this bumps into the larger issue of the fact that the local blog scene is largely uncritical -- lists, repurposed press releases, gossip, but very little in the way of insight into the strenghs (other than those touted by the proprietors) and weaknesses of the establishments featured. I was briefly on the free dinner gravy train, and can't help but wonder if the blogging crowd is unwilling to bite the hands that feed them and occasionally liquors them up -- and, to be sure, gives low-budget operations a chance to get around a lot more than they could if they were on their own dime.

[SeanMike]

can't help but wonder if the blogging crowd is unwilling to bite the hands that feed them and occasionally liquors them up -- and, to be sure, gives low-budget operations a chance to get around a lot more than they could if they were on their own dime.

As a local blogger...

If I have nothing good to say, I won't say it.

Folks in the industry know who says good and bad things about them. They're especially touchy about the bad - sometimes, it can help make things better, but there can be jobs at stake, and I've had people tell me that they avoid bloggers who don't think of the consequences of what they post. Obviously, they can't ignore reporters from (say) the Post, but if you're "just a blogger", they'll avoid you.

It's not just the food industry. In my day job, when I blog, I am not allowed to say anything negative about products. When I did video game reviews, you never wrote something negative in a *preview* - you might say something like "and when it's released, the UI should be better" or phrase it otherwise like that.

Because in the video game world, if you slag the preview, you never get another one...

So when I blog for Scofflaw's Den, I'm not doing big formal reviews like Sietsma tries to do - I don't hide who I am, I'm not usually concatenating multiple visits into one review, and most of all, unless I talk to the folks involved (bartenders, managers, etc.) and tell them ahead of time, I'm not just going to start slagging them. If I have an issue, and I talk to them about it before and say I will talk about it online, I will, but I don't think it's fair for me to sneak around looking for things to bad mouth and then start screaming them out.

After all, I want people to be successful. I've got enough negativity in my life, I don't need to add to it by tearing down what others are trying to do.

[Waitman]

As a local blogger...

If I have nothing good to say, I won't say it.

Folks in the industry know who says good and bad things about them. They're especially touchy about the bad - sometimes, it can help make things better, but there can be jobs at stake, and I've had people tell me that they avoid bloggers who don't think of the consequences of what they post. Obviously, they can't ignore reporters from (say) the Post, but if you're "just a blogger", they'll avoid you.

It's not just the food industry. In my day job, when I blog, I am not allowed to say anything negative about products. When I did video game reviews, you never wrote something negative in a *preview* - you might say something like "and when it's released, the UI should be better" or phrase it otherwise like that.

Because in the video game world, if you slag the preview, you never get another one...

So when I blog for Scofflaw's Den, I'm not doing big formal reviews like Sietsma tries to do - I don't hide who I am, I'm not usually concatenating multiple visits into one review, and most of all, unless I talk to the folks involved (bartenders, managers, etc.) and tell them ahead of time, I'm not just going to start slagging them. If I have an issue, and I talk to them about it before and say I will talk about it online, I will, but I don't think it's fair for me to sneak around looking for things to bad mouth and then start screaming them out.

After all, I want people to be successful. I've got enough negativity in my life, I don't need to add to it by tearing down what others are trying to do.

First -- I can see your point, and blogs have many purposes. But I suppose I'm of the mind that uncritical information -- from my perspective as a consumer -- is almost the same as no information. And I'd quibble with the idea that honest and fair criticism is "tearing down what others are trying to do." There are shades of gray between boosterism and vicious attacks.

Out of curiosity, does your blog get you free drinks,velvet rope-cutting privileges and invites to hip after-hours parties with industry insiders. (Not to accuse you of anything, btw, but since this is the subject that started the thread, it might be relevant.)

(Slightly off topic: if some kid is goinf to spenf $50 for a new video game, isn't it unfair to him not to point out its flaws? The thing about blogs is that they mainain a sheen of objectivity, which you suggest is often illusory).

[DonRocks]

First -- I can see your point, and blogs have many purposes. But I suppose I'm of the mind that uncritical information -- from my perspective as a consumer -- is almost the same as no information. And I'd quibble with the idea that honest and fair criticism is "tearing down what others are trying to do." There are shades of gray between boosterism and vicious attacks.

I'd argue that uncritical information (as things stand now in the Washington, DC world of restaurant "journalism") is decidedly worse than no information, and restaurants driven by PR, as opposed to quality, are playing right into it.

Look at the latest blog post on CityEats. It's written by someone who has lived in Europe for months, and is, believe it or not, a recipe for a cocktail from Bandolero. That's all it is ... just a recipe.

Think quick ... how many other restaurants can you name on the north side of M street on the same block as Bandolero?

See what I mean? How can this possibly help the public?

When's the last time you've seen something about what Frank Ruta is cooking now? Palena isn't active in "pay for play" journalism, so they're usually not invited to the party.

On the bottom-right of that screen, you'll see a list of Most Popular Posts, sorted in descending order by number of comments. Not a single post has more than three comments. And, in a related development, Eater DC has recently started an "Open Threads" category which seems to be modeled on Sietsema's Table - the editor poses a question, and the hoi polloi chime in. It remains to be seen whether there will be any editorial engagement deeper into the conversations. I'm pretty sure that in the case of Sietsema's Table, Tom was stretched so thin that he simply didn't have the time - he certainly had the knowledge. Doing anything more than planting the initial seed in an interactive dialogue is a tremendous commitment of effort.

I guess people are trying to pry eyeballs away from Yelp! Well, why not? There's a very large pie there, and all it takes is a little sliver. I wish them all well.

[Waitman]

Think quick ... how many other restaurants can you name on the north side of M street on the same block as Bandolero?

Sign of the Whale, Johanna's 1819, Ozio (or one of those cigar bars) and Malaysia Kopitam. Also, Bell's liquors.

ETA: Daily Grill.

Late and lamented: The original Mad Hatter, that other strip joint that's not Johanna's and (few will remember this) the Astor.

[mdt]

First -- I can see your point, and blogs have many purposes. But I suppose I'm of the mind that uncritical information -- from my perspective as a consumer -- is almost the same as no information. And I'd quibble with the idea that honest and fair criticism is "tearing down what others are trying to do." There are shades of gray between boosterism and vicious attacks.

Out of curiosity, does your blog get you free drinks,velvet rope-cutting privileges and invites to hip after-hours parties with industry insiders. (Not to accuse you of anything, btw, but since this is the subject that started the thread, it might be relevant.)

(Slightly off topic: if some kid is goinf to spenf $50 for a new video game, isn't it unfair to him not to point out its flaws? The thing about blogs is that they mainain a sheen of objectivity, which you suggest is often illusory).

Well put. I also note that many of the bloggerati neglect to include info about attending a PR dinner or that something was comped or what have you.

In the same regard it is funny to see chefs on FB complain about negative posts in social media and then turn right around and share other positive ones. And I agree that only posting positive info is extremely misleading. So I guess I should assume that if some blogger talks about a restaurant and only discusses 2 out of 20 things on the menu that I should assume that the rest were crap and stay away.

[DonRocks]

Sign of the Whale, Johanna's 1819, Ozio (or one of those cigar bars) and Malaysia Kopitam. Also, Bell's liquors.

I said Bandolero, not Camelot!

[SeanMike]

First -- I can see your point, and blogs have many purposes. But I suppose I'm of the mind that uncritical information -- from my perspective as a consumer -- is almost the same as no information. And I'd quibble with the idea that honest and fair criticism is "tearing down what others are trying to do." There are shades of gray between boosterism and vicious attacks.

No, you're right there. But that's why I try to talk to the managers, etc., before I post something critical. In the end, I've learned the hard way that there are almost always other factors in play, and what might seem like one thing is really something else entirely...

Out of curiosity, does your blog get you free drinks,velvet rope-cutting privileges and invites to hip after-hours parties with industry insiders. (Not to accuse you of anything, btw, but since this is the subject that started the thread, it might be relevant.)

Well, let's tackle these in order...

1. Free Drinks: Definitely. I've gotten them, my friends have, etc. Honestly, a lot of times I don't know ahead of time that I'm getting one, and I never ask for one. I make sure that I tip off those drinks, and I make sure my friends do too. The big thing is that I do tell folks I get free drinks but I do not discuss specifics. Nothing is more awkward than having someone go up to a friendly (to me) bartender and saying "Well, *he* said you gave him a free drink, and I want one too...."

In other words: I disclose that I get free "stuff" but try not to get into specifics unless it's extremely relevant or pertinent. And also: see after point 3...

2. Rope-cutting? I mean...not really? I don't think. Well, maybe. Again, see after point 3.

3. Not without paying for them! Well, most after parties are "did you know about it" and that's just part of "being there". Or knowing the right folks...

...and really, the overall point: often times, it's who you know. It's not hard to get to know folks in the hospitality industry because they're so damned hospitable! You don't need a blog you just need to be friendly and hang out...

(Slightly off topic: if some kid is goinf to spenf $50 for a new video game, isn't it unfair to him not to point out its flaws? The thing about blogs is that they mainain a sheen of objectivity, which you suggest is often illusory).

Thus "preview" versus "review". The video game world is a cruel, treacherous place that I was so happy to leave.

I've been screamed at and chewed out about my video game reviews and I stood by every word in them because they were accurate. If you wrote a negative preview, though, you just didn't get any more - and the page hits on previews were much higher than reviews.

There's a reason it's rare that I buy a video game opening day...(though I do have Borderlands 2 pre-ordered and I'm ready to joy-puke in excitement!).

[SeanMike]

And I agree that only posting positive info is extremely misleading. So I guess I should assume that if some blogger talks about a restaurant and only discusses 2 out of 20 things on the menu that I should assume that the rest were crap and stay away.

Well, remember most bloggers don't have the budget of Sietsma, Carman, or Kliman, and so it can be harder to review everything on the menu...

[Ericandblueboy]

So what motivates bloggers? Sounds like it's the freebies and being first in line.

[Eric Ziebold]

So what motivates bloggers? Sounds like it's the freebies and being first in line.

I look forward to reading the responses.....

[foodobsessed6]

Good discussion and some issues I struggle with regularly. What motivates me as a blogger? I like to write and I like to eat. I spend a lot of time writing my blogs and so I do like it when my blog posts are read. I know that when I write a good review it's more likely to get shared by a restaurant and will get more attention. But I also know that if I don't write honest reviews I will lose credibility. My intention is never to hurt a restaurant by saying something negative, so I think long and hard about what and how to say something critical.

I've attended some media events and don't usually blog about them, although I will sometimes tweet. If I do attend a media event or get free food or special attention, I always disclose. I'm not in it for free food but I do appreciate a good media event now and then. if I go to a media event and the food is good, it is likely to get me back as a paid customer.

Sometimes I feel like giving up my blog, but then a friend or someone I don't even know tells me they read one of my posts, and as a result of my recommendations had a great meal somewhere, and that is usually enough to renergize me.

[SeanMike]

So what motivates bloggers? Sounds like it's the freebies and being first in line.

I never even considered those when I started, nor do I consider them now.

My story of how I started liquor blogging:

I've always loved to write. I did a lot of short story writing, occasionally participated in NaNoWriMo, and eventually thanks to a friend of mine picked up a gig writing video game reviews and MMO blogs for GamersInfo. I also covered E3 every year, did local press events, etc., for that. My payment was free video games (usually shitty ones, natch) and getting to attend those events (though transportation was on my dime).

The thing is, the video game industry sucks. I've met some great people in it, but over all, it sucks big fat hairy donkey balls. As I worked my ass off at E3 every year and saw other reviewers go from our site and do jack, and saw how our site was ignored whenever anyone bigger showed up, I was steadily burning out on it.

I'd started a personal blog where I ranted about stuff, wrote book reviews, etc. But that was mostly just to keep the writing urge at bay.

In the spring of 2007 I decided I needed a new hobby to siphon off my extra energies and money. I started considering getting into Warhammer 40K miniatures (because I am a huge dork, and also because I hoped to meet the moms of some of the other players...) when Marshall came up to me.

He said, "We're going to start using fresh juice for our cocktails, and making our own simple syrup, and check out these blogs I've been reading about cocktails!"

Given that my usual cocktail was ... uh, beer ... I was like "WTF are you talking about, dude?"

He talked me into it. I said, though, that if we were going to experiment with cocktails, we should write up what we were doing, because it was interesting. So we started a LiveJournal for it.

We blogged away, not really expecting anything of it. Got to meet some other blogs (online meeting, that is) and found them friendly. Marshall heard of a mystical place known as Ace Beverage, and we went there, and found Joe Riley to be very friendly and welcoming.

Anyways, the Museum of the American Cocktail was having a dinner one night and we decided to go. I know all the "big names" would be there, but given my experiences in the video game world I figured they'd be aloof if not unfriendly. Marshall was much more willing to dive into the fray.

We went and the first drink I remember seeing was Adam Bernbach's "Parappa the Rappa Punch" which was named after a video game character. We chatted for a bit and he was quite friendly. We then got to meet other folks like Gina, etc., but what cinched the whole blogger thing (SO BLAME HIM) was Mr. Derek Brown.

We got a chance to chat with him, and he was extremely friendly and gregarious. "Oh, I love reading your blog," he exclaimed. "We need to go out drinking some time, I'll introduce you to some folks!"

"Yeah, right," I thought, and went off into the night, figuring he was just saying that to be nice. Marshall took him seriously, followed up with him, and soon he took us out and introduced us to all kinds of folks (except Tom that night, since he'd already left for the night).

What I discovered is that the industry is full of incredibly friendly, awesome people who just want everyone else to have as much fun as they do (or more). What I tried to bring to my blog is that enthusiasm, that sense of learning about new things - be it history or be it new flavor combinations or new places to visit - and to help other folks learn and get excited about cocktails and liquor and the industry.

Is it cool that I get free stuff sometimes? Hell yeah it's cool! I also try to give away as much of my free stuff as I get so others can try it, and I tell PR folks etc. that I won't guarantee a good review (or one at all) unlike some other sites. My last bottle I got for free was fairly not-good, but I haven't seen any reason to do a whole blog post on one bottle (and to say "meh"). If I can put together some others, I might. (Those tend to end up as Twitter micro-reviews, really, as more and more bloggers use Twitter as a fast and easy way to interact with readers without having to write a whole post.)

Do I get to go to cool events? Yeah, but usually I'm paying for them. I'm off to Tales in 6 days, but no one is paying my way. The only time I got any compensation for Tales was a couple hundred bucks for a panel I sat on (and heck, I was on the board of directors for our blogger non-profit - and now I'm the president of it! But we have no budget.)

There are people who blog because they are working their way into for-profit writing and journalism. Good for them.

There are people who blog because they like free stuff and want to be "cooler" than everyone else. Not good for them.

Most of us are just folks who like to write and share knowledge and the fun - like, I'd wager, most folks on this board. What motivates me? The sheer friendliness and generosity of the industry motivates me to try to pass that on, whether through the blog, on Twitter, or in person.

[Ericandblueboy]

I like to write and I like to eat....I know that when I write a good review it's more likely to get shared by a restaurant and will get more attention. But I also know that if I don't write honest reviews I will lose credibility. My intention is never to hurt a restaurant by saying something negative, so I think long and hard about what and how to say something critical.

I'm not in it for free food but I do appreciate a good media event now and then.

I like to write and I like to eat but I don't blog. If I write a review here, I doubt any restaurant will pick it up (with few exceptioins), but there's a pretty big audience for this website. So my reviews are read yet I'm free to be critical. The downside is I don't get free food and no one invites me to any event. Frankly, I don't have time for these PR events.

Is it cool that I get free stuff sometimes? Hell yeah it's cool! I tell PR folks etc. that I won't guarantee a good review (or one at all) unlike some other sites. My last bottle I got for free was fairly not-good, but I haven't seen any reason to do a whole blog post on one bottle (and to say "meh").

Do I get to go to cool events? Yeah, but usually I'm paying for them. I'm off to Tales in 6 days, but no one is paying my way. The only time I got any compensation for Tales was a couple hundred bucks for a panel I sat on (and heck, I was on the board of directors for our blogger non-profit - and now I'm the president of it! But we have no budget.)

There are people who blog because they like free stuff and want to be "cooler" than everyone else. Not good for them.

Most of us are just folks who like to write and share knowledge and the fun - like, I'd wager, most folks on this board. What motivates me? The sheer friendliness and generosity of the industry motivates me to try to pass that on, whether through the blog, on Twitter, or in person.

I share my knowledge about food with no expectation of return. I'm still a little surprised that bloggers are getting freebies. I can only guess that the industry is "generous" because the lopsided publicity warrants it. It's a heads restaurants win and tails customers lose situation.

[foodobsessed6]

I'm not afraid to be critical if it's warranted. My current review of La Forchetta is but one example.
I've had plenty of people thank me for bringing a restaurant or particular dish to their attention. The comment about lopsided publicity and " it's a heads restaurants win and tails customers lose situation" is unfair to apply to all blogs and bloggers.

[SeanMike]

I share my knowledge about food with no expectation of return. I'm still a little surprised that bloggers are getting freebies. I can only guess that the industry is "generous" because the lopsided publicity warrants it. It's a heads restaurants win and tails customers lose situation.

I'm not seeing where it's a "someone has to lose" proposition, as long as the bloggers are being honest about what they get. Marshall and I have spent a lot of time and money building our brand, working on blog, and building it up past "just a blog" while trying to be fair and honest with both sides of the equation.

Like I've said, there are bloggers out there who just parrot press releases and whatever else they're asked to say. It's not hard to find them. But there are a lot of bloggers out there who are trying to put out a resource - hopefully to be entertaining and informing but either way, they're not forcing you to read them.

[DonRocks]

Lori and SeanMike, you are the last two people anyone would associate with ethical lapses.

[Ericandblueboy]

You rarely, if ever, hear anything negative from those that attend.

I think this bumps into the larger issue of the fact that the local blog scene is largely uncritical -- lists, repurposed press releases, gossip, but very little in the way of insight into the strenghs (other than those touted by the proprietors) and weaknesses of the establishments featured. I was briefly on the free dinner gravy train, and can't help but wonder if the blogging crowd is unwilling to bite the hands that feed them

If I have nothing good to say, I won't say it.

unless I talk to the folks involved (bartenders, managers, etc.) and tell them ahead of time, I'm not just going to start slagging them. If I have an issue, and I talk to them about it before and say I will talk about it online, I will, but I don't think it's fair for me to sneak around looking for things to bad mouth and then start screaming them out.

I'm of the mind that uncritical information -- from my perspective as a consumer -- is almost the same as no information.

I'd argue that uncritical information (as things stand now in the Washington, DC world of restaurant "journalism") is decidedly worse than no information.

I agree that only posting positive info is extremely misleading.

I know that when I write a good review it's more likely to get shared by a restaurant and will get more attention. But I also know that if I don't write honest reviews I will lose credibility. My intention is never to hurt a restaurant by saying something negative, so I think long and hard about what and how to say something critical.

I know people blog. I just assumed it's a hobby and never gave much thought about the economic aspects of the arrangements. This is really the first time that I realized what is probably obvious to most people - there may be some quid pro quo going on. People get invited to events, and they reciprocate by writing nice blogs. My earlier point is that a restaurant would be motivated to invite bloggers because if things turn out great, they'd got lots of honest praise. If things don't turn out good, they at least won't get bad press. The customers, who don't know the how the system works, may not realize there's plenty of omitted information in the best case scenario, and plenty of false information in the worst case scenario. I do appreciate the honest responses about this whole cottage industry.

[DonRocks]

I know people blog. I just assumed it's a hobby and never gave much thought about the economic aspects of the arrangements. This is really the first time that I realized what is probably obvious to most people - there may be some quid pro quo going on. People get invited to events, and they reciprocate by writing nice blogs. My earlier point is that a restaurant would be motivated to invite bloggers because if things turn out great, they'd got lots of honest praise. If things don't turn out good, they at least won't get bad press. The customers, who don't know the how the system works, may not realize there's plenty of omitted information in the best case scenario, and plenty of false information in the worst case scenario. I do appreciate the honest responses about this whole cottage industry.

Yes, Lori's and SeanMike's responses are like breaths of fresh air. Imagine a lawyer "working for free," not accepting payment for legal services. They wouldn't "trash" their clients; nor would they defend them in the least (unless they were deemed financially needy). Rarely is there any obligation to strike "balance" - you're either "for" or "against." Walking the blogging tightrope is - or should be - more of a difficult, certainly less well-defined, line.

I am listed on very few restaurant websites because I don't give out unqualified gush. It's a shame because I think my opinions, good and bad, are worth infinitely more than "just the glowing, good ones" issued by the girls of Love.

Why would Mike Isabella link to my honest, perfectly fair post, I would argue the most balanced post ever written about Graffiato? Of course he wouldn't because it contains bad as well as good. Yes, it's the only one that's honest, and it's the only one people can rely on, but are they going to link to it? Of course not - why would he link to anything less than a glowing review?

That's the way it is in the restaurant blogging world. You suck up, or you don't get acknowledged; I choose not to get acknowledged.

[ad.mich]

So what motivates bloggers? Sounds like it's the freebies and being first in line.

Frankly I've considered starting a blog simply to let some of these media events cover some of my dining out. I actually checked last week to see if www.initforthecomps.com was still available (oddly enough it is - I guess there's not much market for honesty).

From the people that I know and have met who have done it, many like writing and appreciate having the outlet, at least at the start. Once you're in the PR churn though if you want those free meals you can't exactly be critical, and you're also getting their best swing in an attempt to impress.

At least the bloggers get something out of it. If you can explain to me the yelpers writing 2000 word screeds you're a smarter person than I am.

[thetrain]

At least the bloggers get something out of it. If you can explain to me the yelpers writing 2000 word screeds you're a smarter person than I am.

http://www.yelp.com/elite

[ad.mich]

http://www.yelp.com/elite

From the yelp site:

Only a shimmering smorgasbord of stuff that'll change your life: Nifty new friends, über-local gatherings, invites to fun (and free!) parties at least once a month, and a shiny profile badge. Most importantly, you'll join the ranks of some of the most influential tastemakers on the site and in your city. Desperately seeking schwag? You'll have first dibs on everything from Yelp sunglasses and lip balm to sweatbands and temporary tattoos. Represent!

WHERE IS MY DON ROCKWELL LIP BALM.

[DonRocks]

From the yelp site:

Only a shimmering smorgasbord of stuff that'll change your life: Nifty new friends, über-local gatherings, invites to fun (and free!) parties at least once a month, and a shiny profile badge. Most importantly, you'll join the ranks of some of the most influential tastemakers on the site and in your city. Desperately seeking schwag? You'll have first dibs on everything from Yelp sunglasses and lip balm to sweatbands and temporary tattoos. Represent!

WHERE IS MY DON ROCKWELL LIP BALM.

Shifting focus from Dr.com to Dr.Dolittle, perhaps the worst film ever to be nominated for an Academy Award (which is saying a lot) ...

The film's first sneak preview in September, 1967 at the Mann Theatre in Minneapolis proved to be an alarming failure: for instance, the audience had few children, indicating little interest in the source material with its intended primary audience. Furthermore, the general audience response was muted during the screening while comment cards rated it poorly with frequent complaints about the film's excessive length. A shortened edit of the film previewed in San Francisco was no more successful while a still shorter edit previewed in San Jose was marginally better received enough to be approved as the final cut.^[5]
In his annual Movie Guide, critic and historian Leonard Maltin called the film a "colossal dud". Maltin admired the film's photography, but was quick to point out how it nearly bankrupted 20th Century Fox Studios. He admitted, however, that "The movie has one merit: If you have unruly children, it may put them to sleep."^[6] Other critics were similarly harsh.
...
When Oscar nomination time came around, according to the book Behind the Oscar, Fox mounted an unparalleled nomination campaign at which Academy members were wined and dined. As a result, the film was nominated for seven Oscars, including Best Picture.

[ol_ironstomach]

(Slightly off topic: if some kid is goinf to spenf $50 for a new video game, isn't it unfair to him not to point out its flaws? The thing about blogs is that they mainain a sheen of objectivity, which you suggest is often illusory).

Videogame media shied away from negative reviews for years for one reason: Softline magazine. Never heard of it? It was the number one videogame review magazine until 1984, when a single negative review killed the magazine.

The game was Olaf Lubeck's "Frogger" for Apple, long awaited and long overdue by the time it was released in 1983. Softline published an unusually terse (yet accurate) one sentence review: "Not even close." Game publisher Sierra Online, then the largest of the PC game manufacturers, responded by yanking all advertising from the magazine, and within months Softline was defunct.

[SeanMike]

I like a lot of you as people; but you do precious little good for ordinary consumers; in fact, you cause them harm.

Out of curiousity - define an "ordinary consumer". The tourist who will visit once? The local who doesn't read restaurant reviews, and only goes where they've heard "buzz" about from friends and other sources? The "foodies"?

PR and marketing is to get people talking about a venue. Look at the NY Ave Beach Bar - I think Tom is awesome, and I think the *idea* is great, but I have no urge to go there 99.99% of the time. On the other hand, I hear people talking about it EVERYWHERE. And I talk about it! Even though it's not my scene, doesn't mean it's not others...

Now look at, say, Green Pig. To me, they obviously aimed at two niches right out: foodie types (and I was invited, via Marshall, I think via his fiancee', to the soft opening) and locals. And to me, that's right on, and they're not trying to get the brown flip flop and plaid shorts crowd in.

But these are two very different spots!

(And two spots I feel emotionally vested in, because I am a fan of their owners and their biz, even if one of them isn't the style spot I want to hang out in. Maybe once I can wear shorts again, I'll revisit the former...)

[DonRocks]

Out of curiousity - define an "ordinary consumer". The tourist who will visit once? The local who doesn't read restaurant reviews, and only goes where they've heard "buzz" about from friends and other sources? The "foodies"?

Yes, yes, and yes. An "ordinary consumer" in this case is someone looking for a restaurant, for whatever the reason - just like someone might pick up a Consumer Reports (or whatever) when shopping for a stereo.

PR and marketing is to get people talking about a venue.

Yes, but only as an intermediate step. The ultimate goal of PR and marketing is to get customers inside the door.

Look at the NY Ave Beach Bar - I think Tom is awesome, and I think the *idea* is great, but I have no urge to go there 99.99% of the time. On the other hand, I hear people talking about it EVERYWHERE. And I talk about it! Even though it's not my scene, doesn't mean it's not others...

Now look at, say, Green Pig. To me, they obviously aimed at two niches right out: foodie types (and I was invited, via Marshall, I think via his fiancee', to the soft opening) and locals. And to me, that's right on, and they're not trying to get the brown flip flop and plaid shorts crowd in.

But these are two very different spots!

(And two spots I feel emotionally vested in, because I am a fan of their owners and their biz, even if one of them isn't the style spot I want to hang out in. Maybe once I can wear shorts again, I'll revisit the former...)

I erased what I wrote last night, not because I disagree with it, but because I really don't enjoy being a prick. When I start throwing flames towards every profession with a high percentage of mercenaries (personal injury attorneys, car salesmen, real estate developers, and yes, PR reps), then I essentially become bitter towards half the world, and that's not where I want to be.

I'd like to continue walking the path of "the consumer's best interest" without tearing down others. And, I choose to remain naive enough to think that there is no inherent conflict between the best interest of restaurants and the best interest of diners.

But it is very, very hard for me to remain silent when I have to coexist with people whose job it is to manipulate others.