Comments on: Stephen Downes: dishing the dirt on food critics

By: bpobjie

bpobjie — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:13:20 +0000

You know what’s a really good restaurant? Nando’s.

By: John Bennetts

John Bennetts — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:27:13 +0000

What? Separate comments columns for each version of the article?

Catherina Toh needs to get lout more. Melbourne has an exceptional range of great eateries and certainly not a “small incestuous Melbourne food scene.”

I buy and use the SMH Good Food Guide because it is well organised, consistent, indicates what type of restaurant is where and what is on offer. The rest I decide for myself, and enjoy doing so. The personal experiences of the reviewer(s) I tend to ignore. With the exception of Tetsua’s, I tend also to disagree about the chef’s hats.

A couple of comments on the other list are well worth while. Especially about the article’s author.

By: Catherina Toh

Catherina Toh — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 05:16:52 +0000

Saying the “unsayables” especially in the small incestuous Melbourne food scene - thank you Stephen. The relationships between the top chefs and reviewers in Melbourne must have a lot to do with the highly predictable and unreliable reviews that get published time and time again. The reading and eating public lose out in two ways - inaccurate glowing reviews that leave you wishing you were eating somewhere else and not hearing about the somewhere else serving wonderful food because the reviewers just don’t go where they are not known. We end up doing our own research thank you very much and vote with our wallets and stomachs.

By: Redwhine

Redwhine — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 04:48:48 +0000

Thanks for this article Stephen. As a food punter who reads reviews, what you are saying does give me pause.

By: njptower

njptower — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:35:17 +0000

Wine in metal??? Restaurant should get low mark just for that,!
Restaurant owner works with work colleague of reviewers, hmmm!
If a restaurant is so unsure of its food quality that it bans a reviewer then all the reviewer needs to do is to say that the owners are dubious of the food quality.
Conversely, if the review is allowed, then the restaurant must cop it sweet unless there are inaccuracies in the review like stating the contents incorrectly.

When a review is published, not only the restaurant’s but also the reviewer’s reputation is on the line.

The standards required include a love of food, not celebrity, some food preparation training and experience writing reviews peer-judged before being left to pontificate.