I will try this one more time, though I have a feeling that this may bog down into one of those “no win” arguments.
When have you ever been to a restaurant that is completely bad? Even looking at the awful service attitude at Papa Giovanni’s, many still admit that the food quite acceptable. The prices are not super great either but then look at David Momphard’s last review. Was the fact that we are discussing this on the Internet mentioned, yes. Was the price too high mentioned. yes.
At the mid to upper end there is rarely an all bad restaurant. I think that only one stands out in my mind and that review was completely negative and it was printed. So when you read the reviews, look for the comments, is this too hot, too salty, too noisy, too expensive, too forumulaic, “hotel style” as opposed to original. From most of the reviews I have read this stuff is being printed.
And quite frankly, with some of the restaurant reviews that come out in the British papers, many revel in scoring points on restaurants. Did you ever see that movie Shallow Grave where they are mercilessly taking the piss out of potential roommates? It is the same kind of hit em hard attitude that does not work here and that is a credit to the Taiwanese. The reviewers know that to get ahead they have to give readers the kind of stuff that you would mock if it was on Jerry Springer but find no problem accepting because it is in a newspaper?
Whatever, Fred, but I know who I’d be more inclined to trust. I suppose in Taiwan, the only way to find out about a restaurant is to go there yourself. I can’t stand this “read between the lines” crap. It just makes the reviewer sound like he or she is chickenshit, to my mind. Call a spade a spade, that’s what I say.
And the reason it doesn’t work? That’s right, because the restaurant would cancel its ads in the newspaper, i.e. the reviewer and the paper are publishing on behalf of the restaurant and the readers bedamned. In fact, a review in the paper here is no better than asking the waiter “So, how’s the food here? What’s the service like?”
Okay. I guess you have some kind of axe to grind with restaurant reviews and newspaper policies. Sorry that they do not satisfy you. First not all newspapers are the same, not all have the same policies and not all writers write the same nor editors edit the same.
Reading between the lines is not necessary. Take the last review of Papa Giovanni’s by Momphard. It’s expensive for what you get. King prawns at a princely price. I can think of any number of reviews that have pretty much come out and said this is hotel formula and not originality. If you want this style, this is the place for you. If not, xxx or blah blah blah. This is good but quite expensive. This is expensive but worth the price if you value. xxx
Let me go on the offensive. If you feel this way so strongly, why don’t you give me one specific example of a restaurant that was not covered negatively that should have been. Now there are reviewers out there who write puff pieces and we all know who they are but for the SERIOUS review writers. Where have they gone wrong? I mean obviously there are puff pieces for politics, business, etc. I recall reading that in US newspapers today, up to 70 percent of the articles (or maybe just business) may have been submitted by public relations agencies.
Let’s face it. No one is going to go total aggression like the British newspapers and say, gourmet restaurant, my fucking ass, this place makes steaks that would make a baby’s diaper look appetizing. (and is that REALLY true or pretty heavy on the hyperbole?) Is it unacceptable to say the steaks were a bit rubbery or the steak I had was a bit dry or the center of the ribeye was somewhat greasy and undercooked. Do you need to read between the lines for this or are you disappointed they aren’t saying, I’d rather starve in Africa than eat total shite like this?
We are all bitching about papa giovanni’s. The points we have made were addressed in the review. So… the reviewer did not see where the fuss was so he is wrong or being cowed by advertising departments? I believe that Papa Giovanni is a raving lunatic, but if not EVERYONE experiences this, can I say “you are wrong.”
This is I swear my final comment but …
Find someone you trust, stick with them and do not expect to see the kind of journalism that you would in the UK. If that disappoints you well there are probably no doubt many other things about Taiwan that are not just like back home either (actually this sounds a bit condescending and I know that you have lived here long enough so… you know what my underlined meaning is, right?)
Except that the Taipei Times - the paper in question here - does not promote it’s adherence to local standards, but to international ones. If they want to be an international newspaper, they need to hold themselves to a higher standard. Calling them on it when they don’t is not unreasonable.
I think that this is spill over that would be better posted on the which newspaper sucks most thread. The fact remains that the kind of journalism you are talking about does not happen in the States or Canada or xxx either. It is a perculiarly British preference for in-your-face Jerry Springer style reviews.
That is “cultural” and has nothing to do with the reviews being “ethical” or not. Furthermore I would challenge the “ethical” quality of these reviews when the writers know full well that their fans demand smash and bash writing.
I know where this debate is going because I have read the other thread and I guess all I have to say is that it seems to be a case of cramming the facts to fit into a predisposed tendency to find fault with whichever newspaper. Otherwise, quote me something from one of the “good” reviewers that is offensively puffing up a restaurant and then I will listen.
Now I know of a few reviewers who write that everything is great. This is terrific, the food was out of this world, etc. etc. but I mean a SERIOUS review like Momphard has written. Show me a case of where he has been afraid to address the issues at hand.
Finally, I strongly disagree with the assertion that the bad restaurants are not covered. The fact remains that I have never been to a mid to top level restaurant in Taipei that was unremittingly bad. Let’s face it, if you are eating at Wang’s pork intestine and stomach soup shop in an alley off Yonghe and it is truly bad, why bother to report it. Who the hell would have eaten there anyway? In this case, only if it were something special would it be worth reporting on otherwise who cares? If a restaurant is not important enough to rise above its neighbors on some alley in Banchiao why is it worthy of 700 words in a paper that goes primarily to the foreign community? That’s all I am saying.
[quote]It is a perculiarly British preference for in-your-face Jerry Springer style reviews.
That is “cultural” and has nothing to do with the reviews being “ethical” or not. Furthermore I would challenge the “ethical” quality of these reviews when the writers know full well that their fans demand smash and bash writing.
[/quote]
Fred, I’d be interested to hear what papers you are referrng to here. The Scotsman is one of the stuffier, more conservative, nay, worse, calvinist, of Britain’s quality broadsheets. Its reviewers are very far from being “Jerry Springer” in style, they are very far from being “smash and bash” writers and their readers certainly do not demand and would not welcome “smash and bash” reviewing.
No, the reviewers (or at least the only one to whom I specifically referred) have hard-earned reputations that come as a result of their honesty and integrity – calling spades spades. Restauranteurs know this very well, and know that if they get a bad review, it is indeed well-earned. They fail to act on their criticisms at their own peril.
This creates a situation which is beneficial to all – the reviewer (increased reputation) the restauranteur (increased covers/profits as a result of attending to problem areas) the customer (obvious) and the newspaper (maintains its reputation as a trustworthy organ).
That being said, some of the reviewers here (your, ahem, “friend” not excluded ) are moving in this direction, which is very welcome indeed. I have seen the changes over the years. But there’s still a ways to go – and there’s absolutely no need to stoop to “Jerry Springer’s” level, either.
Please thank your “friend” for his efforts as a reviewer. I still read “his” stuff with (mostly) pleasure.
Point taken regarding the positives of reviews to reinforce and reward. I thought you meant that one that writes for the Sunday edition of the Guardian? Whatever his face is and he tends to use the shock jock approach (if that is the right term?).
And I am sure that my, ahem, friend will be very happy to receive your words of encouragement and should you find anything in my, ahem, friend’s writings that don’t “wring” haha true, then please do tell me so I can pass it on to him.
Come to think of it, I can’t remember a single instance where I visited a restaurant because I saw it reviewed in one of Taiwan’s English dailies. I usually go by word of mouth, albeit admittedly the person recommending a restaurant to me may have first read about it in one of the dailies.
Anyway, I generally read restaurant reviews for their entertainment value. IMHO, they can be divided into two camps: 1) those published in the Taiwan News / the China Post; 2) those published in the Taipei Times.
Those in group 1 tend to read like PR pieces, a few of them being so ludicrous that they have an allure similar to that of a really bad movie (i.e. you just can’t stop looking at it). This is not surprising in the case of the China Post, since it is a family-owned business and highly dependent on advertising. The Taiwan News, on the other hand, has the financial backing of a large parent company
Yes, but his honesty with the proprietor is a conflict of interest and makes his review of restaurants completely useless to the reader. And the fact that he is getting his meal for free strikes me as being unethical also. Way to go David! You’ve just made your advertisement/review completely irrelevant to its target audience.
I agree with Gustav. Perhaps Momphard is suggesting we all call ahead and say we’re restaurant reviewers before we go to any friggin eating establishment in town! Besides, I understand the Times reimburses them anyway, so what’s the big deal about ‘free meals’?
He is absolutely insane in his logic, and the TT is mad for letting that go to press. :?
What a prick David Momphard is for putting that in print. How can we trust anything this guy writes now that we may know he has been “influenced”. A review should be objective but now we know Momphard is open to bribery however that bribe manifests itself. He should be fired. Corrupt little s**t.
I think it is a rally bad idea to fake your credentials. Morally corrupt and open to legal action. What are you going to do when no review gets published? No, posting it here does not count, do not try to weasel out of it.
I believe he was being facetious and taking the piss out of the whole review-writing business. I agree with way2go: You know some of these restaurant reviewers are getting a free lunch, but when’s the last time they ever said as much? “No more surreptitiously taking pictures” says to me that this was the first time he’d called ahead and he’s showing how different it is from when a reviewer goes “under cover”.
Maybe. But at the end of the day, bearing this review in mind, how can we believe what he says in subsequent reviews? I cannot believe that he is being that subtle in his piss-taking of restaurant reviews.
Do you get the feeling that he’s trying to get fired? What’s the policy at the TT? How many months of severance pay (if any) does a person get if he/she quits as opposed to being fired and does it matter what the person was fired for?
I wrote the “bizarre” review of Corner. I wanted to show how different the reviewing experience is when a restauranteur knows she/he is being reviewed. It didn’t work.
My visit to Corner was the first time I’d called ahead to arrange a review. Doing so is modus operandi for many reviewers but I think it’s important to review a “regular” dining experience. Of course I’ve talked with owners after eating a meal; it’s the best way to find out more about the restaurant. I’m not reimbursed for the meal outside of the paycheck I receive and a bit of gao fei for the photo, which rarely covers the tab. And I usually visit a place at least twice before writing a review. As such, I feel pretty unconstrained in what I write.
Nah, I thought it was great idea. There are now four (or maybe five – gluttony clouds my memory a bit) restaurants eagerly awaiting tomorrows Taipei Times so they can read D. Momphard’s review of their establishments. Some of them were a little concerned that I’d be able to remember enough to write about them, but I assured them in ringing tones that “Momphard’s a trencherman who can handle his ale, now bring me your finest brandy and send the bill to the Taipei Times.”
It was great idea, David, thanks. It works well, too.
Thanks for the explanations in your post. However, with all due respect, may I suggest that if you are unable to write critical reviews (as evident by the Taven fiasco and the subsuqent backpedaling and rewriting), then you simply seek out places that serve good food and tell readers in Taipei about them.
No writing about review writing. No deep thoughts or uneeded adjectives piled on to describe the food. No witty quips about “monkey business” up the street when writing about another bar.
Simply, seek out places that serve great food (and I’ll bet that most won’t be advertisers in the Taipei Times) and write about them.
If you can’t find any, don’t write a restaurant review. Let Yu Sen-lu (sp.?) or Vico Lee write away. You can go back to the Tech Roundup or a feature or take a turn at the Popstop (come on, Max Wooodworth must need a break from translating Next magazine gossip into English).
The “bizzare” meta-restaurant review failed miserably. Why don’t you try a new tack: Write restaurant reviews about places that serve great food.
) are moving in this direction, which is very welcome indeed. I have seen the changes over the years. But there’s still a ways to go – and there’s absolutely no need to stoop to “Jerry Springer’s” level, either.