World O' Restaurant Reviews ...

[Smiles]

I've always loved restaurant reviews. And especially those written for 'The Globe & Mail' by Joanne Kates back in the 80's and 90's. She was without peer and usually her reviews were better than the restaurant being lauded, or skewered. Not that I actually sat down for dinner at most of her choices as I lived in British Columbia and she was 95% Toronto. Once in awhile she toured Vancouver, and twice I happened to be sitting in one of her reviewed. She was a great writer ... loved going off on tangents, dared you to follow her there, in the middle of a review regarding Middle East cuisine at some Vancouver dive she ended up in Istanbul, then Beirut.
Joanne is now retired and the Globe is worse off for it. When I heard that I sent her an email only slightly gushing ~ I'm not much of a gusher ~ over something or other, and she replied most graciously.

And now Peter Wells, restaurant reviewer of the New York Times, being made story of by The New Yorker. If you are in the mood ~ it's a very long article ~ so smother yourself in truffles and have a good read.
The first sentence alone in this article is pretty well worth the admission as it has to do with a New York restaurant that you really must try: it's called Momofuku Nishi so say no more. :(

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/09/12/pete-wells-the-new-york-times-restaurant-critic

[francois]

I read the first sentence and stopped after that. What am I missing?

[cdnmatt]

Lost me on the 4th paragraph when the author began comparing the restaurant critic's arrival to Van Halen and a bowl of M&Ms before a concert.

[Smiles]

Obviously two more gentlemen who have succumbed to the general dumbing down of the Brave New World of Tweeterism.
Tweeters = 1. Momofuckyou Nishi = 0.

What are you missing​? Attention spans. :crazy_mini:

[cdnmatt]

I prefer video. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0qeWRs3usg

[Surfcrest]

4022

For me, the best option is Trip Advisor. Most friends I know keep it on their phone and allow it to direct them to the best of what's nearby, as it is GPS connected. Even just seeing the sign on the door is enough for me to trust it enough for a try. Sure thre are new restaurants that haven't made it on the listings, old restaurants that remain on long after they are gone and I imagine some owners pad their reviews. The restaurants with the most reviews and highest overall score are usually best bets.

Surfcrest

[fountainhall]

Even just seeing the sign on the door is enough for me to trust it enough for a try.
Surfcrest, I can't believe what you wrote! I happened to come across an article on the Asia Guys blog site posted here which you and others should read about TripAdvisor before you place your unfailing trust in any other TripAdvisor review -
http://www.asiaguys.net/do-you-trust-travel-reviews-on-sites-like-tripadviser/

You are way behind the times in trusting many of the reviews on Tripadviser. Basically the writer of that article points out that Tripadvisor is close to a con trick. Hotels, restaurants, their PR agents, their suppliers and anyone else dependent to even a small extent on the business of the establishment are often persuaded to write in fake short reviews giving 5-stars - all in an effort to boost the rankings of that establishment. Read what the writer says of the Marina Bay Sands Hotel and how it has risen up the rankings in Singapore despite being a pretty awful 5-star hotel - through lots of fake reviews.

I would not have believed that article had my interest not been peaked by a long article in the New York Times 4 years ago. This was about books but the principle is the same.


“The wheels of online commerce run on positive reviews,” said Bing Liu, a data-mining expert at the University of Illinois, Chicago (http://bit.ly/3qqmFf), whose 2008 research showed that 60 percent of the millions of product reviews on Amazon are five stars and an additional 20 percent are four stars. “But almost no one wants to write five-star reviews, so many of them have to be created”
And then he went on to cover all reviews


Mr. Liu estimates that about one-third of all consumer reviews on the Internet are fake.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/business/book-reviewers-for-hire-meet-a-demand-for-online-raves.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

A year earlier in an article in TIME magazine, one interviewee Mark Rutherford says this -


“When there are 20 positive and one negative, I’m going to go with the negative”
Why?


How do the researchers reach these conclusions? They compared reviews at TripAdvisor (http://tripadvisor.com/) with those from Expedia (http://www.expedia.com/). The big difference with reviews from these sites is that at Expedia, it’s necessary to have stayed in a hotel—and booked it through Expedia for proof—to write a review of it. TripAdvisor reviews are under no such obligation, and as a result, anyone can pen a review of a hotel, even someone who has never been a guest of the property. Previously, other researchers have concluded that it’s sites like TripAdvisor, where no proof of customerhood is required for reviews, have the highest prevalence of fake reviews (http://moneyland.time.com/2012/02/06/how-computer-geeks-aim-to-put-a-stop-to-fake-online-reviews/).
I know from experience that the ranking on Tripadviser is absolutely no guide to quality or experience. As the Asia Guys blog article points out, any restaurant/hotel/whatever that has a stack of useless 2-line 5-star reviews has been feeding those reviews anonymously to obtain a better ranking. It's certainly not the "most" reviews or the ranking that indicate quality. It is only those reviews given by posters who have posted 50 or more reviews and who spend some space explaining precisely why they enjoyed the experience that you should even think about trusting.

[francois]

Obviously two more gentlemen who have succumbed to the general dumbing down of the Brave New World of Tweeterism.
Tweeters = 1. Momofuckyou Nishi = 0.

What are you missing​? Attention spans. :crazy_mini:

Smiles, this is the first sentence in the article I read when clicking on the link you gave:

Pete Wells, the restaurant critic of the Times, who writes a review every week—and who occasionally writes one that creates a national hubbub about class, money, and soup—was waiting for a table not long ago at Momofuku Nishi, a modish new restaurant in Chelsea.


Not sure just what is intriguing about it? Or what am I missing?

[Smiles]

" ... Not sure just what is intriguing about it? Or what am I missing? ... "
Sigh.
Francois, I think all I said in the opening post was this: " ... If you are in the mood ~ it's a very long article ~ so smother yourself in truffles and have a good read ... "

That's all. If you were in the mood, and if you want a good read.
Good grief man, I did not say you'll enjoy it (though I did). I did not think you would actually smother yourself in truffles (though now I think you should). I was hoping, someone, perhaps only one, would get a good read. Apparently not.

Did you even read it? Something you said about reading only four paragraphs tells me you did not, so how you can say the article was not intriguing?
But carry on ... don't read it. But in not doing so, please spare me any attempt to tell you what you're missing.

[francois]

I only read the first sentence which you said would be worth the admission. Here is first sentence:

Pete Wells, the restaurant critic of the Times, who writes a review every week—and who occasionally writes one that creates a national hubbub about class, money, and soup—was waiting for a table not long ago at Momofuku Nishi, a modish new restaurant in Chelsea

Guess it did not motivate me to read further.