It’s more than 1 million listeners will vote in deciding the winner in each of its 30 categories.
It’s more than 1 million listeners will vote in deciding the winner in each of its 30 categories.
Tuesday 5 May 2020, Day 5 of Level 4 Lockdown after 35 days at Level 5 😷
Corona Gratitude 🙏
#Grateful for a lovely warm sunny day; for getting so used to our Exercise Time, that 14C at 7h30 feels warm enough for a sleeveless exercise top, and for being so energized and warm when I return home that I can sit down and work immediately; for bumping into Haakon and Thomas again, and walking with them on my way back home, a lovely (unplanned) way to meet up with friends; to stumble across the Surfer Protest at Glen Beach, without knowing initially what it was all about, until I read that it happened at a number of beaches, with police action in Sea Point and Muizenberg but none here; with litter along the way to pick up, still balking at removing the dog poo along the way; for the lovely pics I can take at this early start to the day; for my fabulous friend Llewellyn Lambert who helped to reduce the content of my Blog as it was exceeding the capacity of my web host, and fixing a few other Blog design issues – such a good friend that he has all my passwords, and it is he who umhacked my Social Media Accounts almost a year ago; 🍎🍎🍎🍎 for Auto & General Continue reading →
I have come across a blog called “Food Blog Code of Ethics”, compiled by two food bloggers in America, which has raised the important issue of ethics in food blogging, which principles can apply to wine and other blogging too. The Code raises important issues for South African bloggers in dealing with the ethics of blogging.
Brooke Burton writes the blog ‘FoodWoolf’, subtitled “the restaurant insider’s perspective”, and Leah Greenstein’s blog is called ‘SpicySaltySweet’. They got together with other food bloggers to create an ‘union of ethical food bloggers’, setting “Reviewers’ Guidelines” and compiling the Code of Ethics. We do not necessarily agree with all their principles, but welcome it as a foundation for a Blogging Code of Conduct that we may jointly subscribe to as members of the Food & Wine Bloggers’ Club.
The blog post on reviewing restaurants states the following principles they subscribe too – our comments are in italics.
1. One should visit the restaurant more than once, and state if the review is based on only one visit – we do not agree that a review should be based on more than visit, as the strengths and weaknesses of a restaurant are usually the same and apparent immediately. Restaurants should strive for consistency, so that the reviewer should experience it in the same way on any visit. Reviews help restaurants improve their food and service quality, if they are smart about facing them and learning from them, not always a strength of restaurants. Multiple visits are expensive, as most visits are paid for by the reviewer. On our Blog we will update our impression with a Postscript, as we did recently for La Mouette, for example, in that the experience was vastly different compared to previous ones, highlighting a consistency problem.
2. One should sample the full range of dishes on the menu – this is a hard one to implement, as many menus are excessively big. Taking a partner to lunch/dinner and ordering different dishes helps, so that the reviewer can try a larger number. Recently we were criticised by Richard Carstens’ sister-in-law, Leigh Robertson, for not having a starter at Chez d’Or, and that writing a review based on tasting three dishes only was not fair to the restaurant. I doubt if a starter would have made my review any more positive. Having a wide range of dishes, when paying for it, is a cost and a space consideration.
3. One should be fair to a new restaurant and wait for a month after its opening, to give it a chance “to work out some kinks”, and should qualify reviews as ‘initial impressions’ if the review is done in less than a month after opening – bloggers have become very competitive, and some want to write a review about new restaurants before their colleagues do. Our reviews state when the restaurant opened if it is new, so that the reader can read such “kinks” into it. The first ‘Rossouw’s Restaurants’ review of La Mouette raised the issue of how quickly one can/should review a new restaurant, one of Rossouw’s inspectors having been at the restaurant on its first or second day of opening. Two visits to Leaf Restaurant and Bar on two subsequent days showed their acceptance of customer feedback by moving the ghetto-blaster they have set up on the terrace from on top of a table, to below it, after my comments to them about it. No other business, play or movie has a second chance in reviews being written about it, in that they are normally done after opening night – so why should restaurants be ‘protected’ in this way? No business should open its doors when it is not ready to do so (Leaf held back its opening because it had problems in getting a credit card machine installed by the bank)!
4. One should specify if one received a meal, or part of it, or any other product for free, and should also declare if one was recognised in the restaurant – absolutely agree on the declaration of the freebie, and we have regular Blog readers and Commenters who delight in checking blogs for the freebies. Some bloggers are labelled by such readers as not having credibility, in that they usually only write about meals they received for free, and usually are very positive about them, so that they can be invited back in future! The recognisablity of the reviewer is an interesting issue. I always book in the name of “Chris”, with a cell number. If I know the owner or a staff member of the restaurant, I will state that in the review.
5. One should not use pseudonyms in writing reviews, and reviewers should stand up and be counted by revealing their names – absolutely agree. In Cape Town we have a strange situation of Food bloggers who hide behind pseudonyms. Andy Fenner (JamieWho) wanted to remain unidentified when he started blogging, yet appointed a PR agency to raise his profile, and was “outed” by Food & Home, when they wrote about him, using his real name. He is now open about his real name (probably being irritated by being called Jamie more often than Andy, I assume). One wonders what bloggers using pseudonyms have to hide? Wine bloggers seem to be more open and upfront about who they are. I would like to add here how difficult it is to make contact with Food Bloggers in particular . Most do not have a telephone number nor an e-mail address to contact them on their blogs, and one has to use a Comment box to contact them, which most do not respond to. Yet many of these bloggers are looking to make money from advertising on their blogs.
The Code of Ethics which the two bloggers prepared with their colleagues is as follows:
“1. We will be accountable
2. We will be civil
3. We will reveal bias
4. We will disclose gifts, comps and samples
5. We will follow the rules of good journalism
The above aspects are clear and need no elaboration. The last sentence of the Code is odd though, in that we are “new age” journalists, and must play by the same rules as the print, radio and TV media do. That means we must research our stories, to ensure their accuracy. One can correct a blog post if one makes an error, including spelling and grammar ones. An American food blog recently added a note about getting the name of a restaurant reviewer wrong – she did not change it in the blog post, but wrote an apology at the bottom of her post, highlighting the error, which most readers probably would not have picked up. A controversial issue is the announcement of Reuben Riffel taking over the maze space at the One&Only Hotel Cape Town, which Riffel has denied. No correction or apology to Riffel or the hotel has been posted,
We encourage Bloggers and Blog readers to give us their views on the Code of Ethics as well as the Restaurant Review guidelines, which we will be happy to post. I would like to get the ball rolling by stating that the Code should include the publishing of Comments, even if they are controversial, as long as they do not attack the writer or the subject of the blog post with malice, and the Commenter is identified, as is the family or other relationship of the Commenter (e.g. JP Rossouw’s and Richard Carstens’ sisters-in-law). I would also like to hear views about revealing to the restaurant that one is writing a review, in that I was recently criticised by the co-owner of Oskar Delikatessen for not asking permission to write a review and to take photographs, which contradicts the Code on writing unidentified. A third issue is the acceptance of advertising on one’s blog, or accepting sponsorships for brands, and how this should be revealed.
POSTSCRIPT 22/8 : Reuben Riffel’s appointment as the new operator of the restaurant at the One&Only Hotel Cape Town has been announced in the Sunday Times today. We congratulate Spill blog on having had its ear to the ground in announcing this news ahead of all other media. The One&Only Hotel had denied speaking to Spill about Reuben’s appointment at the time that they wrote the story, and Riffel had denied it too.
POSTSCRIPT 29/8: Since writing this post, the identity of The Foodie as being David Cope has been revealed by Crush!2. Furthermore, Clare “Mack” of Spill Blog (with her husband Eamon McLoughlin) has been identified as being Clare McKeon, an ex-Irish TV chat show hostess, columnist, author of “The Emotional Cook”, magazine beauty journalist, and owner of the Bliss Beauty Salon.
Chris von Ulmenstein, Whale Cottage Portfolio: www.whalecottage.com