The document discusses the evolving role of restaurant critics and reviews in the digital age. It notes that traditional newspaper critics now have less influence, while online reviews from bloggers and sites like TripAdvisor have more long-term impact. It also examines different perspectives on how restaurants should respond to negative reviews, with some emphasizing customer service and loyalty over criticism.

1. DINING EXPERIENCES
STICKS AND STONES
40 ISSUE NINE
In an era where everybody has something to say,
Thomas Hobbs analyses the evolving role of the
restaurant critic and the impact a negative review
has on restaurateurs
Written by Thomas Hobbs | Images © John Arandhara-Blackwell
STICKS
STONES
40 ISSUE NINE

2. 41ISSUE NINE
W
iththe240-character‘Twitterreview’now
commonplace,restaurantsarelearningfast
thatsimplyimpressingthespikybroadsheet
criticonopeningnightisnolongerenough
whenitcomestosecuringapositivedocumentedreputation.
Itisn’tjusttheimpendingvisitofA.A.Gillsendingshivers
downthespinesofrestaurantownersnowadays.Theyalso
needtosecureapositiveTripAdvisoraverageandwinover
thebloggingcommunity.
NewspaperslikeTheTelegraph,IndependentandMetro
haveallcutbackonrestaurantreviewersoverrecentyears.
Doesthismeanthattraditionalcriticsarebeingreplacedby
thenoiseoftheweb?
‘Thebroadsheetsdon’tdoasmuchdamageastheyused
to,’reckonsScottCollins,co-founderofMEATliquor.’It’s
moreaboutentertainmentandcleverprosefor
clicksnowadays.’
Only11%ofusarebasingourdiningdecisionson
recommendationsfromtraditionalreviews,accordingto
thelatestdatafromHorizons,with77%ofBritsfavouring
word-of-mouthtipsfrommembersofthepublicandfamily
orfriends.
‘ThereisnodoubtthatTripAdvisorisofhugeimportance,
norestaurantcanaffordtoignoreit,’addsNicolaKnight,
directorofservicesatHorizons.
Currentlyintheprocessofopeningarestaurantin
Singapore,MEATliquorhascomealongwayfromitshumble
beginningsoperatingoutofastreetvan,andCollinssays
reviewshavechangedtoo.
‘Ithinktherestaurantcritic’sopinionislessimportantnow
asitisthefoodbloggersandtweetsthepublicarebasing
theirdecisionson.Eventhecriticsarebasingtheirreviewson
what’strending,’hestates.
’Ifyou’reafiftyyear-oldcriticreviewingafriedchickenjoint,
you’renotgoingtogetasmuchoutofitas,say,fiftyTwitter
userswhohavegonespecificallylookingforthatfood.’
TheGuardian’soutspokenhousecriticJayRaynerwasonce
thatmiddle-agedman,whenhegaveCollins’BrixtonMarket-
based,recently-acquiredCHICKENliquor(orWishboneasit
wascalledin2013)ascornfulreview.
Rayner,however,disagreeswithCollins’assessment,andis
convincedthepublic’sappetiteforaconventionalrestaurant
review-particularlyifnegative-isstillverypresent.
‘PeopleseemtothinkthatallIdoisslateplaces,butlast
year,sixteenofmyreviewswereneitherherenorthere,
twentyfourwerepositive,asin‘gothereimmediately’,and
onlyninewerenegative,’heexplains.‘Butitwasthosenine
thatpeoplefocusedon.’
A bad restaurant experience can leave diners suffering
from a mild form of trauma, according to scientists from
Stanford University, who searched through one million
bad dining reviews in a recent study. They also found that
the language used in terrible reviews is comparable to that
used in reports made in the aftermath of 9/11.
So what keeps us so hooked on reading them?
Rayner reminds me that his recent slaughter of
expensive steak-and-crab dinery Beast has been shared an
impressive 17,500 times, and viewed over 150,000 times.
“Critics only
get invited in
the first few
weeks. Blogs
are reviewing
restaurants
years after
they’ve opened,
so they have
more long-
term impact” –
Andy Hayler

3. DINING EXPERIENCES
STICKS AND STONES
42 ISSUE NINE
‘As human beings we like to feel better about
ourselves,’ he offers. ‘If I’ve had an awful experience at
someone’s restaurant, you know you’ve had a better day
than me, and that’s satisfying.’
Leeds-based smokehouse chain Red’s True BBQ
received a visit from Rayner in May 2013, and the
subsequent review, comparing the presentation of ribs
to a garbage-filled bin in his teenage son’s bedroom,
didn’t sit too well with co-owner Scott Douglas.
‘I was in Disneyland with my kids and my phone went
mental,’ he explains, with a wry smile. ‘So I tweeted to our
20,000 followers and asked them if Jay was right. It all
got a little out of hand, and I can only apologise.’
Although he admits he was upset by the review,
Douglas says he cares more about the reactions from
loyal regulars on social media.
He adds; ‘We weren’t open for long when Jay visited
and the kitchen was still in a process of bedding in. Look,
we took a lot on board from that review, and we’d love to
invite him back - but we’d make him pay next time!’
As the only person to have ever eaten at all of
the world's three-Michelin-starred restaurants,
[MasterChef] critic Andy Hayler has a dining record that
puts most of us to shame. Surprisingly, he has sympathy
for Douglas.
‘Critics only get invited in the first few weeks, bloggers
don’t,’ he muses. ‘It could be that a place had a rough
start but they quickly settle or get a new chef. Blogs are
reviewing restaurants years after they’ve opened, so
they, and TripAdvisor, have more long-term impact.’
Rayner, however, is less forgiving.
‘If they have opened and their kitchen isn’t fully
operational then they deserve everything they get.
I’m quite serious about that. The moment you charge full
price you are fair game. I don’t go looking for bad
experiences. I am writing about how much pleasure your
money will buy you.’
So how can a restaurant learn from a bad review – be it
in the newspaper or otherwise? Hayler says it’s all about
thinking ahead.
‘The key to restaurant success is returning regulars, so
just bear in mind the fact that the impact of critic reviews
is short-term. There was a certain Michelin-starred
French restaurant in South Kensington subject to some
really nasty xenophobic reviews from critics, but that
didn’t stop it turning a profit.’
‘I think it is all about customer service,’ says Red’s True
BBQ’s Douglas. ‘We’ve made a point out of focusing
everything on our customer relations and that’s led to a
loyal following that’s almost religiously connected with
our brand. That will help us become a chain.’
Rayner concludes: ‘If it is because the whole concept is
bad from top to bottom - like Beast - there’s nothing they
can do, bar hope someone likes it. Otherwise you need
to have the nerve to change everything and start again.
Look, as critics, we never had power to close a restaurant.
We are simply the doctors diagnosing the disease; not
the assassins with the stiletto.’
THE GOOD THINGS
REVIEW VIEW
To learn more about Good
Things’ own approach to
restaurant reviews, visit
goodthingsmagazine.com