PrintLos Angeles Times: Food Critics Not So Anon Anymore
Though much hand-wringing was done about the waning anonymity of food critics last month and in various publications (including here on Serious Eats), Regina Schrambling manages to write a new take on the issue in the Los Angeles Times by going big-picture and surveying all the recent unmaskings.
In the article, Schrambling (Gastropoda) points to instances of food critics either getting outed (Craig LaBan, Philadelphia Inquirer; Jonathan Gold, L.A. Weekly) or outing themselves (blogger-cum–newspaper critic Danyelle Freeman; legions of food bloggers who don't necessarily try to hide their mugs). Google, she writes, has led to a new openness, though Schrambling doesn't really opine too much on whether that's good or bad, instead gathering the thoughts of those affected as well as critic Gael Greene and Los Angeles restaurateur Eric Greenspan.
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.
4 Comments:
I haven't read the article yet, but didn't Gold out himself? If I remember, all those photos of Gold after he won the Pulitzer were posted on the L.A. Weekly website. Given that he works there and his wife is the editor, I always assumed he didn't care about posting the photo.
TAPrice at 6:31PM on 09/12/07
Ah. You're right, TAPrice. He essentially did "out" himself, I think.
Adam Kuban at 6:37PM on 09/12/07
The best points I got out of the article were that (1) most big food critics have always been known by the restaurant industry, (2) it's more important to not announce who you are during the reservation process or to the maitre'd, and (3) never ever accept comped meals (duh!). Personally, I have chosen to go the anonymous route. But, I can see how it wasn't my only option.
foodette at 7:04PM on 09/12/07
I think that reviewers should take comped meals. But I think it should be done semi-anonymously. Specifically, I think that newspapers should accept gift certificates from restaurants to encourage reviewers to come in, but they shouldn't announce who they are and there should be an explicit expectation that the gift certificate will just ensure that the reviewers comes in the door, but that they're going to be honest from there. No quid pro quo. I'd also suggest that it may be worthwhile to have a layer between the reviewer and the restaurants so that restaurants send GCs to the paper not to the journalist.
Newspapers are short on funds and so often I see reviews based on one meal. Or they only go to the big name places because they want to make sure the article has a large audience and they aren't wasting their money exploring restaurants.
extramsg at 3:09AM on 09/18/07