PrintMichelin, Yelp, Zagat: Who Can We Believe?
The (Michelin) stars must have been truly aligned for Serious Eaters yesterday, because Michelin introduced its 2008 New York restaurant ratings two days after the Wall Street Journal ran a piece questioning the validity of online restaurant reviews written by bloggers and eaters who don't pay for their meals. (Full disclosure: Contributors to Serious Eats, Slice, A Hamburger Today, and Ed Levine Eats who review restaurants pay for their meals unless explicitly stated otherwise ).
The juxtaposition of these two events provides a perfect opportunity to discuss the relative merits of reviews and judgments rendered every which way, from on high (Michelin and the New York Times) to online (Yelp and Zagat).
The Michelin rating system is a combination of the Edsel and the Yugo, a clearly outmoded source of reliable information. It sends its anonymous inspectors out to every restaurant it is considering for inclusion in its guide. That would be fine, except when you read the Michelin Guide, it is clear that some restaurants get short shrift because their entries in the guide contain outdated information clearly gleaned from press releases.
Even more problematic is the criteria used in the Michelin rating system. The quality of china, stemware, and flatware a restaurant uses stopped being relevant to the quality of food being served years ago, except when it comes to three-star restaurants. Ditto for thread count of the tablecloths and the napkins.
Michelin has never acknowledged that the only two things that matter in a restaurant experience are the quality of the food and how welcome and special a restaurant makes its customers feel when they walk through the door. Perhaps the Michelin Guide executives should make every one of its inspectors read Danny Meyer's book. If they had, they would have realized that Momofuku Ssäm Bar, Esca, the Little Owl, Hearth, and Ouest, to name a few, deserved at least one star.
It's time for the Michelin Guide to get new tires, because right now it's so flat it needs to be taken off the road. It's not clear that the Michelin guides have gotten any traction with U.S. diners. Europeans are probably the main purchasers of the Michelin U.S. guides, and with the dollar being so weak, they are coming to eat in America in droves. That's why U.S. restaurateurs turn out in droves at the press conference announcing the arrival of the new Michelin Guide each year.
The Yelps (and other websites, blogs, and print publications) that accept free meals (sometimes en masse) and the Zagats of the world present a different set of issues and problems for readers and users like me.
Serious Eaters are looking for reviews—judgments, really, that they can trust, that they can believe in. That's why the New York Times continues to be the most powerful reviewing force in New York restaurants. The Times has been a source of credible, reliable, and trustworthy news, reviews, and commentary for more than a hundred years now. It has earned readers' trust because its reviewer tries to dine anonymously, pays for every meal, and goes at least three times before rendering a judgment.
But even the Times's influence has been waning in the face of tremendous competition from online citizen brigade reviewers both filtered (Zagat) and unfiltered (Yelp). Many smart, sophisticated people all over the country simply don't regularly read any newspaper any more.
The Zagat Survey was the first entity to offer a voice to passionate restaurant-goers who pay for their own meals. Trying to put the hammer in the hands of many people instead of one sounds like a step in the right direction. And, in theory, it is. But the Zagat Survey has been plagued by charges that it is simply too easy for friends, restaurateurs, and employees to stuff the ballot box. So how trustworthy the Zagat ratings are remains an open question.
Then we have the true citizen's brigades like Yelp. It is problematic and vexing to say the least when we read about restaurants offering free meals en masse to Yelp users and other bloggers. But I must point out that long before there were blogs and websites many (reputable and disreputable) print and broadcast journalists were feeding at the freebie trough. So to say the blogosphere is the engine driving restaurant freebies is not only disingenuous, it's flat-out wrong and downright dishonest.
In the end what is a serious eater to do? Restaurant freebies are not going away anytime soon, offline or on. Many, if not most, food writers and the publications they work for cannot afford to pay a living wage to restaurant reviewers that would include a healthy budget to pay for meals.
All any of us can do is find people online and off we can believe, people who we know share our tastes and values, and follow their forks and hearts to restaurants they like.
We serious eaters will develop our own filters comprising many different sources of information for restaurant reviews and tips. That reliable, trustworthy person or entity and resulting filter may be Frank Bruni,
Zagat, Yelpers, Restaurant Girl, Serious Eats, Ed Levine, or some combination thereof. Restaurant critic monogamy is neither desirable nor required.
The information, the series of filters, are all out there for the taking. It's up to serious eaters everywhere to connect the dots any way they see fit.
Add a comment:
Previewing your comment:
HTML Hints
Some HTML is OK: <a href="URL">link</a>, <strong>strong</strong>, <em>em</em>
Comment Guidelines
Post whatever you want, just keep it seriously about eats, seriously. We reserve the right to delete off-topic or inflammatory comments. Learn more at our Comment Policy page.
If you see something not so nice, please, report an inappropriate comment.
17 Comments:
I was scared when I saw the first episode of Kitchen Nightmares and the restaurant that Ramsay was overhauling had Zagat rating stickers on its front door! True, they may have been old and outdated, but it still started me wondering about the validity of a Zagat rating. Last time I was in NYC I used the Zagat guide somewhat as a base for ideas, but I always double checked sites similar to (and including) Serious Eats before hailing a cab!
Jeana at 12:17PM on 10/09/07
I always questioned the validity of a reviewer as an "official pallet" for New York City. It's seems rather ostentatious at best. Mr Bruni, Mr Platt, how do they know what people really like? Example: Mr Bruni has displeasure with Vong. He has expressed this at different times this past year, Yet the place has been open for 14 years. Hmmm. Solid, good establishments do not last that long in this town. Many people obviously enjoy dining at this establishment.
1- The best way to gauge the revelence of the surveys is to see which restaurants rate in the top group in all the major ones. Mobile, Zagat, Michelin and the Times. Example: Per Se and Jean Georges. These places hit the high ranking in all 4. Three stars from Michelin, 4 - NYT, 5 with Mobile, 27 and above in Zagat. This puts Per Se and JG as good bets to be exquisite places to dine.
2- The best way to gauge the restaurants before trying is word of mouth.
3- The best way to get your opinions across without paying 20 grand for an ad in the newspaper is the blogs. (Thank you Mr. Levine for having a good one)
VongNY at 12:22PM on 10/09/07
kitchen nightmares was dreadful. same producers as hell's kitchen? the UK version works because they let Gordon run the show, he's the one giving the opinions on whether or not the restaurant is listening to him. the US version uses the same narrator as Hell's Kitchen instead of letting Gordon talk. no idea why. show was a huge let down.
alktraz at 1:03PM on 10/09/07
alkatraz - what would you like to see different in Kitchen Nightmares? Gordon goes in, finds whats wrong with a restaurant, usually simplifies the menu and cleans the joint up, and the place seems to run better after he's done. Only big difference I can see is that the end of the UK version has him checking back p on the place after awhile.
relapse at 1:42PM on 10/09/07
Hey folks - in the interest of keeping comments on topic I've started a new thread to discuss Kitchen Nightmares. Carry on!
Alaina Browne at 3:11PM on 10/09/07
that WSJ story is getting mad coverage. Why are people so quick to crap on bloggers? Here's exhibit A, Mario Batali:
http://eater.com/archives/2007/06/why_i_hate_food.php
What's he doing now? Oh right, contributing writer for SeriousEats.com. Interesting.
Anyway, I think Bruni said it best on the dining section blog about how restaurants change day-to-day. Anyone who cares to read reviews online this day in age would probably go to various different sources to judge the ratings. A careful eater would also consider Bruni's point that consistency may vary.
foodinmouth at 3:25PM on 10/09/07
foodinmouth, that Batali post was sited in the WSJ article. Did you read it?
me3dia at 5:33PM on 10/09/07
I would never comp a meal to a serious restaurant reviewer. Nor would I send out an extra course or offer any other special treatment. Sure there are tiny neighborhood publications who publish what are basically promo pieces written by hobbyist reviewers who do get their meals comped, but I don't think most people really take them too seriously.
In Boston there are 2 critics who are fairly well known among chefs and restaurateurs. Sadly they make their presence known, whether by flamboyance or simply announcing themselves. They've both come into my restaurant and I've sent nothing to either one. The other serious reviewers - we have maybe three more - I wouldn't recognize. They, too, have been in, but I still couldn't pick them out of a lineup.
Online reviews are different and generally shouldn't be trusted. There are many shills posting positive reviews and many competitors posting negatively. Zagat, I think, is okay, but certainly not perfect. Several years ago in Boston, Zagat came out with diner quotes and restaurant ratings for a restaurant that wouldn't even open for six more months.
zapatista at 5:48PM on 10/09/07
What does Frank Bruni have against Jean-Georges Vongerichten? Was he a former employee or something? Leave Vong alone already! He trashed it in it's last NYT review and now wants to take Jo Jo down with it.
Vong NY - right on!
Stevie at 5:51PM on 10/09/07
That's quite a story about zagat, zapatista. Serious Eats should gather all the questionable Zagat dealings in a single post. We would of course call the Zagats and ask for a comment on each of them.
Ed Levine at 6:10PM on 10/09/07
I can't believe no one has mentioned Chowhound. Mostly amateurs but fair, knowledgeable, and passionate reviews
jackiecat at 7:25PM on 10/09/07
Mat Shaffer broke the Zagat story in the Boston Herald and was nominated for, but did not win, a Beard Award for it. I think the Boston survey has since sharpened its pencils. Ruth Tobias is now the local editor, and she is a peach.
Chowhound, IMHO as they like to write, varies widely from market to market - much like the dining audience.
zapatista at 10:00PM on 10/09/07
I would trust a survey type review (Michelin, Mobile) over an individual one (Bruni). Nothing against Frank, but the surveys send more people over the course of the year. Survey also aren't the general public (Zagat). Private surveys allow for consistency to be checked, anonymity to be maintained and no "cheerleading" for ones favorite celebrity chef.
If I may address Stevie's comment on Bruni: Frank gave Jean Georges a 4 star benediction. He has a firm belief that the quality of the dishes at some of his establishments suffer due to the fact that he has many to tend to.
I will admit however that it seems awkward to have Frank Bruni's negative remarks on some of JG's restaurants in his blog and yet the New York Times is co-sponsoring the tribute dinner for Mr. Vongerichten at the Miami Food and Wine Festival this coming February.
ZoeyPage at 8:35AM on 10/10/07
me3dia,
yes, i read it. in fact, let's revisit verbatim what the WSJ said about Batali:
"For Mario Batali, the tipping point was an article on Eater about a dispute between him and one of his restaurant's landlords. In response, he wrote an article for the site titled, "Why I Hate Food Bloggers," in which he decried blogs as bastions of "untruths, lies and malicious and personally driven dreck."
My whole point was that ppl are quick to bag on bloggers, case in point Batali. Really, I doubt Batali hates bloggers. Did I read his post on Eater when it first came out? Yes. I even commented on that post on Eater.
To answer your question. Yes. I read the WSJ article. Yes. I read Batali's post on Eater. What is it that you wanted to address about that?
foodinmouth at 9:48AM on 10/10/07
I agree with zapatista on Chowhound. I tend to trust the New York site, because I figure even as amateurs, New Yorkers eat out a lot and have a lot of choices so they know their stuff when it comes to restaurants; but when I checked out my own local market I disagreed so strongly with so many of the recommendations that I had to assume that the reviewers are not serious food or dining people. As a result I don't go anywhere near it for my own local area!
Jeana at 1:50PM on 10/10/07
I Just wanted to tell you how much I love your website, the critic system is having its revolution and it's healthy to see that kind of counter power emerge.
I read the article in the WSJ about the bloggers getting comped by some restauranteurs, in this article the Zagat people were saying that they are able to find out about those restaurants who ask their employees to vote for them. But to be totally fair don't you think they should do the same the other way too? let me explain, imagine some one wanting to harm a restauranteur because he's a direct competitor or he screwed his wife, or for any other reason. The guy asks a bunch of his friends to put bad reviews on Citysearch or to vote against him in the Zagat just to harm the guy, don't you think it can happen too?
My point is that it's time to demonstrate the unfairness of those kind of guides who just put up a computer system that uses and compiles the reviews they get on line and throw up a rating without doing their job to go and check the fairness by themselves. We all know the Zagat is filled with incoherences and still be (partially) responsibles for undeserved successes and failures.
Keep up with the good job !
ForzaMilan at 9:06AM on 10/19/07
Ed - What you call "citizen brigades," especially the on-line version, is what I call the "Tyranny of the Internet." Accepting free food from those who you review is unquestionably an act without merit or ethics - and some very popular reviewers on-line have engaged in and continue this despicable practice. But the tyranny in my mind comes from the hordes of self-payers who are without credential to practice restaurant reviewing. There are too many cases of petty and repeated thrashings of good neighborhood restaurants on-line that have resulted in loss of business and the tarnishing of reputations. I'll take Bruni, Platt and Michelin any day over the Zagat's, Yelps, menupages, community bulletin boards and other uneducated amateur gourmets who blog incessantly about restaurants - just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it's worth listening to.
Livetotravel at 11:29AM on 10/22/07