There is something to this comment, and I don't want to sound accusatory, but it just seems like preferential treatment is given to certain restaurants, and those restaurants are vehemently supported by your staff.
I'm sure it is assumed that the food reviews are written by a single person, and don't cater to the masses. This was evident in years of Debbie Salomon's writing... which has descended from restaurant reviews to the equivalent of how to make good mac and cheese with hot dogs and Velveeta.
It just seems rather short-sided of the food editorial department to me, that's all.
You never reviewed the Bluebird Tavern?
So I would assume that all the press, minus the Bite Club, was given with absolutely no incentive to any employee or friend of 7D? When I say press, I am speaking of the degree and content of all of your published opinions.
And P.S.: I don't work at Kong Chow. I actually manage a bar at a very popular and busy restaurant downtown. I used that alias to see if your opinions, blog posts and forum posts were telling a true story of the restaurants you visited. It's easy to give a good review of a restaurant to a bunch of environmentally-concerned people who drive their hybrid or SUV to the 'nicest' restaurant in the area to spend 100$ and talk about how full they AREN'T.
How about a review of Shopping Bag, who was reviewed by the Food Network as having the best burgers in the area?
Or how about places like the Parkway Diner, across from Hooters, who have been plagued with awful credit, to the point where they CANNOT stock food anymore, (or the Arcadia, however you slice it).
I can't help but feel that your posts carry more weight than the average user. Even though your posts are flagged as 7D staff members.
You forget... every single one of you were served drinks by me at a certain function. I asked my questions, and got honest answers, at least a few drinks into the night.
If you need to, respond privately. I have already received enough e-mails about my honest opinion.
Thanks again.
I am the person who writes all of the restaurant reviews for the paper. Oddly enough, I never actually reviewed The Bluebird Tavern, even though it happens to be one of my favorite restaurants in the city. Why not? Because I knew that the staffers would be able to identify me, and I am always anonymous when I write my reviews. That's the only way to make things fair.
It's true that I've mentioned the Bluebird in the paper a handful of times. I've also mentioned other new places, such as 156 Bistro and The Belted Cow, nearly as many times, but nobody has accused me of playing favorites by discussing them.
The most recent article in which I mentioned the Bluebird dealt with some of the "backlash." Not sure if you saw that one.
There are two main reasons that I've talked about Bluebird a bunch: 1) In my role as a reviewer, my job is to evaluate restaurants critically, and I'm a pretty tough cookie. I can count the number of Burlington restaurants I really like on one hand, and the Bluebird is one of them. Thus, since I eat there regularly, it makes its way into my tweets, my forum posts and my newsletter. Alice happens to like it, too, and she talks about it as well. Being a critic is not an objective task. 2) People, whether they like it or hate it, are really interested in the Bluebird. By creating a thread about it on the forum, we've tried to give people the opportunity to say what they think about it, positive or negative.
