Bad newspaper review

Suppose your restaurant got a bad review from the local newspaper, what would you do?

http://snipurl.com/nnbq

quote:

Originally posted by mvanpatten

Suppose your restaurant got a bad review from the local newspaper, what would you do?

http://www.bgdailynews.com/articles/stories/public/200506/16/0004ttXX_Features.html

First, I'd check my food to see if the review was on target. If it was, I'd try to fix it. If it wasn't, I'd gripe to my friends and family. What I would not do is complain to the newspaper or the reviewer. The guy with the printing press always wins.

Speaking from the other side, as a person who occasionally gets paid to do restaurant reviews, I can say that this reviewer doesn't sound like they're out to "get" anybody. It doesn't seem like an unnecessarily mean-spirited review, but like the reaction of someone who genuinely found the restaurant not up to expectations. Although I certainly wonder who the hell uses a knife and fork (plastic or not) to eat ribs, the ribs as described don't sound particularly nice. So in that situation, I guess the first thing I would do is look at what the reviewer is talking about and see if they maybe have a point about some things.

And if they do, I'd make some changes. If they don't, I'd keep things like I want them, call the reviewer a wanker (privately), and move on.

I dont know... They're entitled to their personal opinion, which is the best I'll give a food critic.. I don't go by what they say... Again, it's their personal opinion... But a suggestion would be is get 110 gal fish tank, stock it with catfish, and let the reviewer grab his own! Maybe then he'll know what pain he's caused you...

Option 2 would be start writing reviews of food reviewers... Let them know the fool tried to use plastic ware to eat ribs...

The reviewer commented:
"The ribs weren't terrible, but they were very fatty. The bones were mushy, as if the ribs had been boiled too long, and the meat was tough, but slathered with sauce."

Plastic forks and peppery beans are the least of a pitmaster's problems after he's been accused of boiling his ribs. If this isn't a "mean-spirited" critique, I'd hate to see one that is. IMHO, I don't think the reviewer knows a whole helluva lot about bbq.

That reviewer is probably happier reviewing Chilis, Applebee's, Ruby Tuesday etc. What a dope. Sorry the baked beans weren't "barbequed" lol.I tried that once and they kept falling through the grates. Probably a great BBQ place that got hit by some young bar hopping rookie. What a world....

Sorry to disagree, but it seems like a perfectly fair review to me. He complains that the pickles should have been free (and who charges for pickles?), that the beans had no flavor (no, he doesn't say that they should have been barbequed, just that they didn't have the promised bbq flavor), that the ribs were, apparently, boiled (if so, the whole premise that this place was worth eating in goes out the window), that certain things were overpeppered and others had no seasoning.

What's the problem here? If the reviewer's wrong, and the place is busy, it won't make any difference. And if the review is accurate, the owner should be kicking himself, and, as Michael notes, his friends and family for not weighing in with some constructive criticism.

If you think that this is a vicious, self-serving, intimidating review, you haven't read any real rough reviewers. The writer is trying to practice his craft and make a living, just like the rest of us. If all of his reviews were gushes, he'd be untrue to his standards and out of a job.

So why is he a dope?

There seems to be a built-in conflict of descriptions in the reviewers writing. The rib meat is tough and fatty, while the bone is mushy as if it had been boiled too long? One or the other could be accurate but I think it would be difficult for ribs to have it both ways.
As for the beans, the description fits a lot of canned pork and beans left 'untreated' by the establishment. If they drain off some of the juices(water) and kick in some shreds of the outer 'que and maybe a bit of spice, onion and or molasses the beans then take on a flavor and consistency of their own. 'Doctoring' is what the guy is supposed to do. It sounds like the owner is cutting corners to me.
I don't think this writer is out of line. I do think he needs to visit the place again, allowing a reasonable time between visits, and compare his second visit to his first. Then let the readers decide if his review is accurate.

Mayor, I agree. But the sad fact is that many of these small papers don't have the budgets for multiple visits, especially for a place with such a limited menu. After all, if you screw up the bbq in a bbq joint, then either it's a lousy place to eat all the time or it's a perilously inconsistent place, either of which would disqualify it for me.

First, who uses a knife & fork to eat ribs with? Ribs, are finger food.

Second, I think it would be hard to boil ribs long enough to make the bones mushy, but the meat still be tough.

You can smoke/bbq them long enough to make the bones mushy.

quote:

Originally posted by porkbeaks

The reviewer commented:
"The ribs weren't terrible, but they were very fatty. The bones were mushy, as if the ribs had been boiled too long, and the meat was tough, but slathered with sauce."

Plastic forks and peppery beans are the least of a pitmaster's problems after he's been accused of boiling his ribs. If this isn't a "mean-spirited" critique, I'd hate to see one that is. IMHO, I don't think the reviewer knows a whole helluva lot about bbq.

I agree with Porkbeaks, I don't think the reviewer knew **** from shamrocks about barbecue......

There is a very popular place in Lagrange that you can't find a parking place come lunchtime.

Oh, in Lagrange.

quote:

Originally posted by Raine

First, who uses a knife & fork to eat ribs with? Ribs, are finger food.

Second, I think it would be hard to boil ribs long enough to make the bones mushy, but the meat still be tough.

You can smoke/bbq them long enough to make the bones mushy.

I've eaten a mess of ribs in my life and I have NEVER encountered "mushy" bones. If they were boiled, and I can't emphasize enough what a slam this is against the pitmaster, I still can't imagine mushy bones. Especially, if they still had any meat left on them. The only possibility I can come up with is that the reviewer was eating rib tips (at Crappleby's they call them "riblets") and instead of bones he was gnawing on the inedible cartilaginous parts that, I suppose, could be described as "mushy".

If they were smoked longer than the required time, they would be dry but the bones sure wouldn't get mushy.

Never seen a mushy rib bone, but have seen plenty of very (soft, almost to the point of being mushy) bones from butts

You may be able to cook a rib bone until mush, just never done it. I think it might be easier to boil one to mush than bbqing one to mush.

Still don't see how the bone could be mushy and the meat tough. But I guess anything is possible. And we don't know how he cooked them.

quote:

Originally posted by Caramel Copper


I found the food to be freshly prepared but bland. When I looked around I saw all Blue-hairs. Retirees....he//, most of them gotta be on low sodium at the very least. Of course no one could mistake BBQ for a health food but if the Res. has return regular customers and this is what they expect it would be hard to change without some griping. . . Some folks like to be able to depend on things. Security Food.

But if this is the situation the review was perfectly fair, no? You can't have it both ways. You can't have bland food to appeal to those with no taste buds and still expect the same food to appeal to those of us who do.

Right or wrong, I think the reviewer called it like he saw it. The goal for a reviewer is consistency. Not everyone will have the same taste as the writer, but everyone should be able to use the writer as a yardstick.

IMO, the review is well written. It speaks very positively about the appearance of the restaurant. The reviewer makes the point that NO ONE in the party really cared for the food, and that opinions on why were consistent as well.

Otherwise, the only ones who can comment on the reviewer's ability to discern good food are THOSE WHO HAVE ACTUALLY EATEN AT SPLIT TREE.


Tom

There was a review in the local paper here last week of a new Mexican place. The review said the food was really quite good, but the service was awful, and was quite specific about the attitude and indifference he encountered there. I wondered what the owner of this place would do upon reading the review. Doubtful you can get another review published. My hunch was that some of the staff got fired and beyond that I think you just move on and try to improve your service.

quote:

Originally posted by pogophiles

I think I know why their reviewer is anonymous...

As a guy who spent time working on my college newspaper, I always recall being told that if you "don't have the b@lls to attach your name to what you say, keep your ****ing mouth shut."

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by stevekoe

quote:

Originally posted by pogophiles

I think I know why their reviewer is anonymous...

As a guy who spent time working on my college newspaper, I always recall being told that if you "don't have the b@lls to attach your name to what you say, keep your ****ing mouth shut."

Steve

One can only assume, then, that your college paper didn't publish editorials.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Hoffman

One can only assume, then, that your college paper didn't publish editorials.

Well, on our very apolitical campus, there wasn't much to editorialize. But, the editorial is the voice of the paper's editorial staff. The masthead pretty well covered that.

Steve

Editorials represent the positions of a newspaper's management, not the editorial staff.

I just read the review again and noticed this tidbit, "The smell hits you first: It's wonderfully woodsy and thick with the scent of barbecue sauce."
Notice he calls it not an aroma, but a smell and the fact that it's "thick with the scent of barbecue sauce" isn't a flattering comment in any way, shape, or form. A top-notch bbq joint offers sauce reluctantly and certainly wouldn't want to have the air thick with the smell of it. The more I think about it, the more I think it's possible this guy does know something about bbq and has written an informative review with his tongue firmly planted in his cheek. Or not.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Hoffman

Editorials represent the positions of a newspaper's management, not the editorial staff.

I don't really mean to nitpick, but we were talking about our college's newspaper -- I assure you, they were one in the same. I attended a small, private university with no daily coverage or competing product (as one might find at a larger, state-funded school). As such, the editorial staff WAS the management, as well as darned near everything else except the printing press. There was maybe a staff of 20 that would start the year, but about 6 of us made a newspaper once a week. To call it a newspaper is kind of even humorous, but it was something to do in college.

We won an award one year when the editor in chief spent the entire semester working on the paper and not attending any classes. I later found out that he was arrested for embezzling money from the student activities account.

Told you....we did EVERYTHING!

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by porkbeaks

I just read the review again and noticed this tidbit, "The smell hits you first: It's wonderfully woodsy and thick with the scent of barbecue sauce."
Notice he calls it not an aroma, but a smell and the fact that it's "thick with the scent of barbecue sauce" isn't a flattering comment in any way, shape, or form. A top-notch bbq joint offers sauce reluctantly and certainly wouldn't want to have the air thick with the smell of it. The more I think about it, the more I think it's possible this guy does know something about bbq and has written an informative review with his tongue firmly planted in his cheek. Or not.

I think you hit the nail on the head. He could very well be an expert----or know less than nothing about BBQ except for what he's had at Tony Roma's. I do find that a problem-----I've read reviews of sushi bars for example where the writer spends time telling how raw fish is a new experience and how much better he likes the "Benihana-style" cooking for example. I wonder many times how they pick the reviewers. I've seen reviews of Chinese restaurants where the story is more about trying to use chopsticks rather than the food itself. I do give credit to this reviewer-----the review was more about the food than a lot I've seen. IS he an expert? I'm on the fence, too. In some ways he seems to know a lot. I wonder if they were tongue-in-cheek too. Unfortunately, by remaining anonymous----we'll never know.

to the original poster:

is this your restaurant this review is about?

If so, have you re-evaluated your food? Have you talked to your customers about it's quality?

There's no harm in either, and certainly a lot to be gained.

quote:

Originally posted by stevekoe

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Hoffman

Editorials represent the positions of a newspaper's management, not the editorial staff.

I don't really mean to nitpick, but we were talking about our college's newspaper -- I assure you, they were one in the same. I attended a small, private university with no daily coverage or competing product (as one might find at a larger, state-funded school). As such, the editorial staff WAS the management, as well as darned near everything else except the printing press. There was maybe a staff of 20 that would start the year, but about 6 of us made a newspaper once a week. To call it a newspaper is kind of even humorous, but it was something to do in college.

We won an award one year when the editor in chief spent the entire semester working on the paper and not attending any classes. I later found out that he was arrested for embezzling money from the student activities account.

Told you....we did EVERYTHING!

Steve

Fair enough.

First off, it's kinda funny what folks will argue over.

My first impression is that this reviewer must be an amateur. These quotes are subject to me:

quote:

The smell hits you first: It’s wonderfully woodsy and thick with the scent of barbecue sauce.

Don't know where you dine, but I've never been in a BBQ joint where I've smelled the sauce aroma in the air. It's either the smoke or the cooked food.

quote:

Among us, we had a rib dinner, three barbecue sandwiches and two sliced barbecue plates, along with a lot of potato salad, barbecue baked beans, coleslaw and corn cakes.

Bolding in quote mine
No reviewer worth their salt would throw down a general term like this. They'd tell you up front what the sandwiches were so you could carry that information through their review.

quote:

The potato salad, one co-worker reported, was quite bland, as was her chopped barbecue sandwich.

There ya go. Now they are specific, but just a little to late to make a professional review.

quote:

The bones were mushy, as if the ribs had been boiled too long, and the meat was tough, but slathered with sauce.

I've eaten ribs that were boiled and can't imagine any meat left on them if they were cooked long enough for the bones to become mushy. It would all be floating in the water. If what they were served were the rib ends, then a pro would know that.

In my not-so-pro opinion the person in an amateur reviewer and writer.

quote:

Originally posted by TJ Jackson

to the original poster:

is this your restaurant this review is about?

No, it is not my restaurant.

I agree with a combination of comments here. If I were the restauranteur, I'd first suck it up and ask my, objectively as possible, was the reviewer right? What can I do better? I'd also ask some people whose opinions I trust. After all, the restaurant apparently has a very cool look. Are people actually coming for the atmosphere and not the food?

I also agree that the reviewer could have, and should have, gone back a second time to determine if the place was having an off day, or if it's truly bad (in the reviewer's opinion.) But, I also recognize that if you've got a column to submit on deadline, and you have no other review in the hopper, you do what you've got to do, unless doing that would be patently unfair. I didn't get the sense the reviewer was being unfair.

Reviews can be a weird thing. I stumbled across a review last year of my favorite restaurant in South Florida. The reviewer gave it a D+. I've shared that review with many other people, and to a person they all think the reviewer was nuts. I can't gauge motivation without knowing the reviewer, and perhaps the review was legit, but it sure sounded like an axe-to-grind review to me. It went well beyond the "off night" concept; he tore away at every component of the restaurant.

I don't want to insult those of you who live outside major metropolitan areas (or have I already done that?), but let's take a little reality check here. The Bowling Green Daily News has a circulation of about 21,000. Any of you out there think that they could afford Ruth Reichl, or any other bigtime reviewer, for their restaurant page?
Some of you are attacking this poor shnook as if he were insulting the flag, or your alma mater, or your mother. He/she is either someone starting out, who needs practice and good editing to go further up the ladder, or someone who just enjoys going out to eat and having the paper pay for his meals in return for what I don't think is a particularly terribly written review.
A few of you have, it seems, done some writing, and are generally sympathetic to the reviewer. Now, having done both, writing and cooking, for a living, I can tell you that from my perch cooking is a walk in the park compared with sitting down at a keyboard. As someone, I forget who, said, writing is easy; you just sit and stare at a blank piece of paper until little drops of blood appear on your forehead.
I'm resisting, or should I say kind of resisting, the temptation to indulge in quoting the misspelled, ill-formed, poorly-thought-out prose in these boards and wondering if there shouldn't be some kind of basic standard of literacy for posting here. But that temptation is trumped by my unshakeable faith in the First Amendment.
So go ahead and bash this guy. I'm sure he's as good at what he does as you are at what you do.