James Beard Award Nominations 2009, No Serious Eats? WTF?
Maybe it's because I'm biased. I know some of the people behind serious eats. It's based here in NYC. I read it at least 3 times a week. Or maybe it's because the Judges at the James Beard Foundation don't stray far from their "old standbys". But WTF?
When I want interesting information about food, restaurants or nutrition. I mean cutting edge, made by the people for the people. I turn to serious eats not the nominees of this year.
In fact, I rarely even land on their sites. Gourmet.com, chow.com, epicurious.com? What?
Chow is owned by CBS now. And Gourmet and Epicurious are both owned by Conde Nast. Is anyone else with me on this? Against me, help me understand this. Do we need to reward those with the deepest pockets or those that produce some of the best content on the web?
Are these the "...best and brightest talent in the food and beverage industry." as the James Beard Foundation claims the awards are supposed to highlight?
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.
Start Talking!
Need a question answered? Have advice to share? Start a Talk topic now!
Sign up to get your questions answered and share advice.
6 Comments:
I think you've uncovered the reason why--but do I agree?
Absolutely not! (this coming from an epicurious visitor as well!)
WTF!?!? Serious Eats rules.
On a positive note; you could look at it this way:
The less people know about Serious Eats at this point the less traffic and the less confusion in finding answers?
I dunno.
I'm sure this superstar blog called Serious Eats will end up off the DL list someday. Until then: I'll bask in the sunshine :)
hungrychristel at 2:17PM on 04/21/09
touche
angrywayne at 2:19PM on 04/21/09
To be honest, I can understand why SE wasn't nominated -- and it has very little to do with the SE team of Ed, Adam, etc.
It has much more to do with the comments (like this one), and the vocal few here who militantly claim and define this space as their own, even while hiding under the auspices of "what the SE founders would want."
Folks like Jerzee, TheRealChiff, LunaPier, etc. -- yes, all active commenters, but really -- honestly -- the core of a group that drives people out.
This board (not SE the site) can't figure out whether it wants to be allrecipes.com or chow.com. Yes, the SE editors allow that. And not that either are the best choices. But my point is. . .this board seems small, cliquish and narrow-minded, and SE has allowed that to continue.
And until that stops, SE's message boards will have three groups:
Those who come, comment, and leave
Those who get active, but then eventually less active because of all the noise
And -- most of all -- the very few who spew opinions and judgement constantly.
It's jr. high playground.. I pick through here occasionally, but really, it's the members -- not the editors -- who ruin this site.
That's why I frequent the other sites, too, and that's why I'd be more apt to vote for them.
mince at 3:23AM on 04/22/09
I'm fairly new to the posting comments on SE. I have to say that this is the only site that makes me feel comfortable enough to do it, and I can't picture myself frequenting another site as much as I do on this one for such an activity. I do see some of what mince is talking about, but honestly, I mostly feel a nice sense of community that is missing from the more corporate food websites. Am I surprised SE is not nominated? No. It's not "legit" (read "corporate") enough for such an honor at this point, but I kinda like that. Keep it up, SE. You are my new favorite site to read everyday.
meem21 at 10:22AM on 04/22/09
The James Beard Awards appear to be nothing more than a popularity contest. It pains me to say this because Peter Kump had a great deal to do with establishing the James Beard Foundation and he also founded the cooking school I attended (now called ICE). It was disheartening to come to this conclusion because the awards should be used as a vehicle to propel new restaurants, chefs and cookbook authors to the forefront. Very few "new names" or locations ever pop up. I'd like the awards to be more about "discovery" and less about stroking people who are stroked on a regular basis.
Using Mince's categorizing, I can't figure out under which heading to file myself. If there's a category that celebrates those grateful that SE is strictly about food, cooking and restaurants with little off-topic noise - stick me there.
The SE crew can confirm or deny but here's my take. The place where the rolling pin meets the dough is this: SE is someone's blog and not a social networking site. It's not a "discussion board" per se, and I think that's one of the reasons there is resistance about whether or not to add a topic subscription function. How many of us come flying into SE.com and completely bypass the front page, opting to head straight to TALK? I was guilty of this but now I make a conscious effort to read the entries. (I would also love to know if additional comments come in on a given entry - but this revisits the "subscriptions" issue.)
I'd love to be able to post a recipe under the RECIPES tab but eventually came to realize that only SE staffers can do that. SE will never be allrecipes.com and to that I sing a very loud hallelujah. Allrecipes.com is a user-contributed website first and foremost - and the recipes are NOT tested. If SE can occasionally accept recipe submissions from participants and test them as part of the acceptance process, then post them - I think that would be fun. However, it would reshape and redefine the site's purpose.
If the JB Foundation is lumping pure blogs together with discussion sites or culinary social networking sites, it's the same as awarding Jethro Tull the Grammy for Heavy Meta over Metallica. - and a great injustice. As sites become clearer in their purpose, awards have to evolve with them. Give an award for a pure blog, a social networking site and a discussion board but don't lump them together. In simpler terms, it's like comparing apples to giraffes, then declaring one a winner.
therealchiffonade at 10:23AM on 04/22/09
My point, was that it falls directly under the qualifications that the James Beard Awards exist for. Those sites that were nominated, simply aren't as creative or innovative. This site, in its entirety, the articles by the editors, the community posts and talk, the connectedness to Americana, this is all what James Beard himself was about.
People that write for, visit read, lurk, and comment on Serious Eats are the Jame Beard's of their time.
I think @mince gets it wrong, all community sites, have some people that can be the voice, that have the time to contribute comments or advice, not speaking as "the authority" but from a gut level of experience.
I think serious eats has a lot of those people. I think some, like me post in large bursts, when they're taking a break form other commitments, and they end up writing a lot, because they have a lot to say.
And others, say things less often, short and simply, and say so much more. That is the nature of community and the pleasure of a diversity of voices, and I've seen quite a diversity of voices here. If anything, perhaps people are driven away by the NY'ness of the site, but I think the serious eats crew have done wonders to ween that away to a different section.
It's an innovative site. I'm annoyed that they didn't get the nomination, when run of the mill "flashy" similar to each other content sites, did. That's it.
Cheers.
angrywayne at 2:17PM on 04/29/09