Restaurant critics aren't as anonymous as they think

by Sarah J. Gim, Posted Apr 10th 2006 @ 4:20PM

If you fancy becoming a restaurant critic, make sure you have a stash of untraceable cash, multiple credit cards with different names, and a wig.

I remember reading about Ruth Reichl's stint as the restaurant critic for the New York Times. She would go out in full disguises, changing her demeanor, her voice, everything, so that restaurants wouldn't recognize her as Ruth Reichl. Critics don't seem to be going that far these days. Restaurant critics dine with friends and family, make reservations under false names, and pay for their meals in ways that don't reveal their identities, all to provide a review based on what it would be like to dine for the restaurant's every day customer.

However, restaurants have become savvy to critics, whose reviews could crowd their reservations lines or shut them down, by educating their staff to look out for critics. They have complete "dossiers" with physical descriptions, photographs, and even explanations of crtics' idiosyncrasies.

It makes me wonder, then, how accurate those 2, 3, or 4 stars really are.

Filed Under: Magazines, Newspapers, Chefs & Restaurants, Restaurants
Tags: dining, dining out, food, food and dining, food and drink, food and wine, restaurant, restaurant critics, restaurant reviews, restaurants

Chew on This

Royal Wedding Cake Details Revealed! - YumSugar

Make Your Own Pop Tarts - CHOW
Denny's Introduces a Maple Bacon Sundae - Eater
Whole Foods Opening Bars in Stores - USA Today
Rules Of Bar Etiquette -- For The Bartender - HuffPost Food

Reader comments (Page 1 of 1)

4-10-2006 @5:04PM cybele said... Sounds like the rest of us should hope that restaurants mistake us for critics so we get the best treatment. I wonder if we can get a hold of those dossiers and maybe I'll change my lipstick color for a day ...
Reply

Vote upVote downReport

4-11-2006 @2:14PM mingerspice said... Great post! I think that's why a lot of people put more faith in Zagat, which seems to more often get it right, since its "reviewers" are anonymous by reason that they are not professional food critics, but just opinionated eaters.

I can't remember how many times I've gone to a restaurant given effusive praise by some food critic and been quite disappointed.
Reply