I can’t believe myself yesterday on the restaurant reviewing panel at Restaurant08 downplaying the influence of blogging.
Of course, what I was doing was downplaying the influence of blogs versus a newspaper such as the Herald Sun which has around 1.8 million readers a day. I’m lucky if I break 1,000 unique visitors a day and for most food bloggers in Australia a few hundred a day is considered quite respectable.
For restaurants or cafes blogs are influential because many journalists read them so they can help get the message out there and perhaps cut through the email and press release clutter – that’s assuming you approach blogs the correct way. And that’s the subject of today’s panel on the internet and blogging.
The key points that came out of yesterday is that audiences are fragmented, there is still a feeling that there is a qualification required (the basics of journalism) to be allowed to review, defamation perhaps holds journalists back and that Crown Melbourne is booming.
Crown’s David Yallouz said that the news that Gordon Ramsay may come to Crown had driven record numbers to its restaurants. He also said that nothing is firm yet and that Gordon will visit Crown in June (he’s out on a very short visit for the Restaurant show in Sydney) to scope possible sites. Crown doesn’t live or die by reviews taking a pragmatic view. I guess this is because it has a momentum of its own. In fact Crown is a medium in itself delivering a certain audience in large numbers.
Interest in it and its restaurants have driven my visitor numbers up by about 30 per cent. I wonder what it will do to some of our loved city restaurants when the coming recession bites.
On defamation, it would be a brave restaurateur to take on a blog, simply because a blog’s influence is small. There again I wouldn’t be surprised if one emerged possibly over the reporting on legal and hygene issues. Rita from Hobart Food for Thought wisely changed the names in this account of a modern day Fawlty Towers in Tasmania that resulted in police charges:
“He then came to get our plates and I said to complement his chef as the meal was really nice he said “ why would I do that- she just gets a big head and there is no point!” then he slammed the door again…
“I went outside then moments later Stuart came out with all our stuff. I said “what’s going on?” And he said: “we have just been thrown out because you used your phone.” I couldn’t believe it. Then Stuart had his back to the door he came out, grabbed Stuart against the door and pushed him on the ground. Stuart hit his head and didn’t move for a moment and he had his knee on his chest, preventing him from getting up.”
And I’ve withheld the name of this two hatterin Melbourne, which handled an alleged food poisoning so badly that a copy of the email arrived here. One of the diners in question works in the food industry and knows about food poisoning issues. The diners subsequently received an offer of a free meal but don’t really want to go back. I would bet that all these peoples friends will have been told about the poor handling on the incident and that a couple of journalists will have received the email (could it influence its score in the Good Food Guide?):
“On Saturday 3 May at 8.30pm we had a booking for five people at your restaurant. We chose a good restaurant because three of the people were overseas visitors and it was a family reunion.
We had a wonderful evening, with very good food and wine, attentive and professional service, and left the restaurant feeling completely satisfied with our choices.However, two of the guests, (who had the same salmon entrée), suffered quite severe bouts of diarrhoea and vomiting at around 1.30 am. The entrées were served around 9.00 pm.
Nobody else in the party was affected.The three visitors got on a plane to go home the next morning, seedy but okay.
We thought the restaurant should know about this, so we telephoned and explained what had happened and were told that the manager would get back in touch with us.
He rang and was very concerned about the event but went to lengths to explain to us that in his business they know a lot about these issues (implying we don’t), and that it was unlikely that food poisoning was caused by food from XXXXXXXXXX, as food poisoning takes six to eight hours to set in.He contacted the visitors in New Zealand and explained to them that it was probably a combination of rich food and wine, which they may not have been used to. He also reiterated that since they had not gone to a doctor to ascertain that it was food poisoning caused by salmon, and it was before the 6-8 hrs post consumption, it can’t have been caused by food from XXXXXXXXXX.
He then offered that if the visitors were ever back in Melbourne, and they wanted to dine at XXXXXXXXXX again, he would like the chance to make it a more pleasant experience.
The visitors have since conveyed their annoyance to me about what they feel is an arrogant manner in which their experience was handled, as they are seasoned travellers, and have never experienced anything like this before.We understand that this was an isolated incident to our party, and there were no other reported incidents that night, but nonetheless two people became ill after eating the same dish in XXXXXXXXXX.
I hope XXXXXXXXXX treats other complaints in a better manner than this has been handled, and I am considering taking this matter further.”
Become a Facebook fan. Follow me on Twitter. 
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Shame about the libel laws here. We could do with some A. A. Gill to keep us entertained. At least you wouldn’t fall into your weetbix in a dead stupor from the sheer boredom of it all, like you do with most Australian restaurant reviewing. It’s fatally boring. Even Stephen Downes’ posturing is tired, while the national newspaper is devoid of anything interesting beyond recycling PR releases and calling it a column.
Newspaper editors don’t seem to understand that it is about the writing first.
The last great restaurant reviewer here was Sam Orr – and even that was a pen name and his column ran in a paper that you wouldn’t want to sue.
On the blogging Vs Trad media panel-careful Ed, dont run with the foxes & hunt with the hounds!
The simple unavoidable fact why restaurants dont respond to issues of possible food poisoning is that they are scared shitless of the implecations to their business & reputation. Not really surprising is it?
I worked somewhere once where an owner watched as a womam slipped on his floor, injuring herself in the process then kept his head down & said that he didn’t see a thing. She confronted him about this & he totally denied that he witnessed the incident, she left understandably upset.
Later he told me that in an earlier cafe he once owned, a homeless & intoxicated man walked through a glass door & his lawyers sucessfully sued, forcing him to lose the business. Since then he just just ignored issues like this because of the the threat to his livihood.
I’m not making excuses here but not many restaurants could weather a food poisoning scare so it dosn’t surprise me that the complaint wasn’t handled as well as the patron would like it.
Kitchen hand, journalists have forgotten the old skills of pounding the streets and asking questions. On my first day i was told to write things that people didn’t want me to know. Nowadays costs are driving many to writing exactly what the PRs want us to know. AA Gill is bigoted, self indulgent and arrogant. Bring him on.
Gobbler, everyone is scared shitless of everything. In the old days journalists were never allowed to say they are wrong for legal reasons. Nowadays some organisations encourage people to say sorry and “handle” a complaint to prevent legal action and the loss of advertising income. Maybe restaurants are a little behind the times.
I’m not defending poor form Ed just pointing out why some react the way they do. I agree that some restaurants are behind the times when it comes to saying sorry but sadly they are not alone, show me a business that does?. I will point out though that there is a difference between ‘handling’ a complaint in order to manage the damage control & demonstrating a trully genuine regret with an appropriate apology.
The times that we live in see large faceless corperations using every slippery trick at their disposal to avoid any responsibility, look at the disgusting way that James Hardie has prolonged is Asbestos related damage payments in order that the victims die off before they get a cent.
I am not criticising the rights of people to rightly seek an appropriate outcome should they suffer food poisoning at the hands of a negligent restaurant.
Your exaple though of some companies encouraging people to say sorry to avoid a loss of advertising revenue does not seem to me to be a at all progressive but merely a sneaky way of getting in first to minimise the damage-in other words, they couldn’t give a shit really as long as sales dont suffer. In that case they are no better than my old boss who didn’t look up to acknowledge the accident in his cafe.
Gobbler, I think the”sorry’ is just being practical about resolving problems especially when there has been a genuine mistake or misunderstanding. I just received an email from another two hatter that thinks the story above was about them. It wasn’t!
Fair enough Ed.
Funny though, we both know how egoccentric those of us in the hospitalty game can be at times so I’m sure there were a number of places that thought it was ‘them’! The place that emailed you just lost their nerve & spoke out!