For several years, the NYT has been making a concerted effort to increase its subscriber base in California. It has based several reporters in the state. I'm not surprised the Times decided to base one of its two restaurant critics in CA. It makes a great deal of sense.
However...I'm not a fan of restaurant critics being "known" to restaurants. I saw this happen in SF with a prior restaurant critic. that person (I'm intentionally avoiding using the critic's gender) was well-known to area restaurants. I witnessed the critic not only monopolizing hosts'/hostesses' and servers' time, but get angry when other restaurant guests attempted to be served. I lost a lot of respect for their reviews after seeing this happen. Concealing a restaurant critic's identity, IMHO, preserves the authenticity and objectivity of the critic's reviews and the publication's integrity.
I am happy that the NY Times is finally thinking outside of New York for regular restaurant reviews. The Times has covered national and international news, but has been very local about its coverage of restaurants. It only covered restaurants outside of NYC occasionally, not regularly. You are either a local rag or an international rag, not sometimes one and sometimes another.
For several years, the NYT has been making a concerted effort to increase its subscriber base in California. It has based several reporters in the state. I'm not surprised the Times decided to base one of its two restaurant critics in CA. It makes a great deal of sense.
However...I'm not a fan of restaurant critics being "known" to restaurants. I saw this happen in SF with a prior restaurant critic. that person (I'm intentionally avoiding using the critic's gender) was well-known to area restaurants. I witnessed the critic not only monopolizing hosts'/hostesses' and servers' time, but get angry when other restaurant guests attempted to be served. I lost a lot of respect for their reviews after seeing this happen. Concealing a restaurant critic's identity, IMHO, preserves the authenticity and objectivity of the critic's reviews and the publication's integrity.
Pretty sure I know who you mean.
I find that even if you are “known” to a place it doesn’t guarantee you’ll get better food or service.
I am happy that the NY Times is finally thinking outside of New York for regular restaurant reviews. The Times has covered national and international news, but has been very local about its coverage of restaurants. It only covered restaurants outside of NYC occasionally, not regularly. You are either a local rag or an international rag, not sometimes one and sometimes another.
More than 60% of NYT subscribers are outside NYC. I think people will like the broader coverage.