[sarahk]

From the NZ Herald

Don't you just feel for the restaurants who feel that the diners don't deserve to have opinions. I know where I won't be going

The point of Garlic and Sapphires was that reviewers don't get a typical experience!

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=10329038

Restaurants choke on web reviews

Krishna Botica

04.06.05
By Claire Trevett

A website that gives Joe Bloggs' view of dining out has come under flak from some restaurants which are pulling out of the service, displeased at being reviewed by amateur food buffs.

A total of 27 restaurants have withdrawn their reviews from the DineOut website, which has 7500 reviews of nearly 3000 restaurants, posted by about 3800 reviewers.

White, at Auckland's Hilton Hotel, pulled out about a year ago despite having consistently good reviews because it wanted only professional reviewers to review it.

Another unnamed restaurant said the forum was "ridiculous and damaging to any restaurant who gets a bad review" and described some contributors' comments as "bordering on stupidity".

The comments upset regular DineOut reviewers. Website founder Tracey Butler said "Joe Public" often had a different dining experience to professional reviewers.

"[Reviewers] get the best table, best staff, 110 per cent effort from the kitchen to ensure their meals are perfect and everything is wonderful. But will the restaurant offer the same level of effort for every person that enters their establishment?"

The owner of oft-reviewed Ponsonby restaurant Prego, Krishna Botica, said some people using the site wrote grudge reviews that could damage a business, but they were usually easy to pick out.

"And isn't every customer a reviewer essentially? There may be experts in the field, but the business is based on every single person that sits down at your tables. You shouldn't treat a reviewer differently just because they are a reviewer."

Herald restaurant reviewer Ewan McDonald disputed the tales of reviewers receiving special treatment from restaurants.

"Most of us jealously guard our independence and I doubt very much that many are even known by face. Also, most serious restaurant-owners simply know it's not worth even making the offer."

He said websites filled out by members of the public should be treated with caution because it was impossible to properly vet contributors.

"They should be treated as entertainment, because it is so open to abuse and manipulation. There have been instances of restaurant-owners using it under false identities to promote their businesses, or use their family or friends, and the public doesn't know. I have also seen people sabotage a business or rival. You don't know who is posting."

Ms Butler said all reviews were checked before being posted, but the site refused to remove individual reviews just because they were bad.

"We do not claim to be perfect at catching the 'dodgy' ones but we do our best based on several years' experience of analysing reviews," she said.

"Yes, they could 'flame' their competition, but they would have to be pretty smart about it or it becomes pretty obvious to regular users."

Ms Butler said feedback from many restaurants was favourable.

[Fat Little Hobbits]

I firmly believe that Time2Dine have good control over contributions. Mike & Di would, I believe, intercept (for the want of a word) a slagger immediately.

I personally cannot comment on the other site, I never go there as I do not like the layout.

Leah and I have one heck of lot of fun not only dining out but also reviewing.

We do not get paid by anyone, we just enjoy our nights out and we use Time2Dine to search for new restaurants. La Mama and Barossa Restaurant are two that we will visit in the next month.

OK, so we are not "professionals". So what!

If, for example, the service sucks - then that is the fault of the restaurant not the non-professional reviewer. And if someone decides to place the comments on the web, then that is their right.

Like politicians, police and any other group that can be in the firing-line, restaurants have to take the brickbats with the bouquets.

If they act and endeavour to improve on adverse comments - good for them.

For example, see our comment on Pompino Restaurant regarding the rest-rooms. A friend went there and said they were now clean and tidy.

Then check out our reviews for the Cazador Restaurant. This is our absolute favourite restaurant. We love taking friends there and it is like being part of the family when we go there.

Reading our posts will show you what we think; good, bad or indifferent.

An interesting point regarding reviews:

Wildfire Restaurant

Went there once and loved it - read the review. Also sent a copy to Wildfire as we always attempt to do.

A group of us from work went back there last month for a social night out. Once again they lived up to the review we had given and we had a fantastic time - or was it?

Read what one of our partners, Ashleigh, posted on the dineout site and compare it to ours. Then pay close attention to what one of the waiters did to her!!!!!!!!!!

She kept quiet because she was afraid what 8 really angry Emergency Services members would do to him!

Needless to say we will never frequent that place again - but we still stand by our initial impression.

Finally, if White Restaurant and the "unnamed restaurant" (scared or what?) only wish to be reviewed by "professional reviewers" then maybe they should think about only catering for them and turn away the public as being beneath their dignity!

[T2DMan]

It is interesting what bad reviews of restaurants will do for a forum. Often I have seen such reviews actually encourage comment and debate. Take for instance the reviews on Allely House or Hell Pizza. Both have actually encouraged debate about the restaurants.

Often when there are no reviews, no reviews will be added. Takes a bold soul to be the first.

Then if there is something contriversial mentioned, those that have an opposing view feel almost compelled to state the opposite, or to write in agreement.

Yes, as unprofessional food critics we may not know the finer points of what restaurants are. We may not have the patience to cope with a bad day. We may think a meal is too cold, too hot, too expensive, too small - when those things are done by design. But often times those uneducated comments will bring on views from those that are in the know.

It also gives the restaurant owner the chance to apologise for bad treatment, or give an explaination or other side to the story. This is great for turning what would otherwise be a bad review for the restaurant, into a marketing exercise.

Lets face it. All restaurants have bad days. And all diners have bad days. We may aggrevate normally patient waiting staff or complain about something not really worth complaining about. But if apologies can be made, other sides of stories be told...

Having a bad review can help us to trust the reviews - can we really trust reviews if they are all giving glowing references about a restaurant???

I had about 5+ really bad reviews entered one after the other on one of my Sydney restaurants. Looked like 5 people sitting in front of a computer slagging the restaurant. I promptly deleted most of them, wrote a short reply saying why the reviews had been deleted, and left several with a rebuttal from me.

I love the response from Fat Bellies Bar Hamilton - a bad review, and a reply from the owner detailing the steps he had taken to make sure the same thing did not happen again. AFAIC I would much rather go to that bar than any of the other Hamilton Bars that had no reviews.

So bring it on!!!