DATE: Sunday, August 10, 1997               TAG: 9708080004

SECTION: COMMENTARY              PAGE: J5   EDITION: FINAL 

SOURCE: LYNN FEIGENBAUM

                                            LENGTH:   94 lines

REPORT TO READERS NEGATIVE REVIEWS GET POSITIVE ``VOTE''

Should The Pilot review restaurants? If so, should negative reviews be printed? Is our star rating fair?

Last Sunday, I posed those questions after several dozen complaints about a Flavor review of Tandom's Pine Tree Inn. More than 60 people replied. The overwhelming response to the three questions: Yes, yes and yes.

``Otherwise,'' e-mailed one woman, ``the reviews are pointless. Movie reviews provide negative comments; why shouldn't restaurant reviews? The reader can evaluate whether he or she wants to accept the negative review or try the restaurant anyway.''

About a half-dozen callers still steamed at the Tandom's critique. But many others supported it. And beware, restaurateurs. Several people offered to submit names of eateries that they feel need a prod from a discerning critic!

Mostly, though, readers encouraged The Pilot to tell it like it is:

Rodger Spruill Jr. of Norfolk says that all he expects ``is just an honest review or article - you know, like `just the facts, ma'am.' I work hard for my money and if the review helps me spend it wisely, then I'm more appreciative of what's put in there.''

``Well, of course you review restaurants and of course you print negative reviews,'' said M. D. Ridge of Norfolk, herself a reviewer of plays, opera and classical music. ``Otherwise it comes under the heading of advertising if nothing negative is ever printed. . . . We do deserve to find out what is good and what is not good.''

Bob Stanton serves as chairman of the Chesapeake Bay Wine Classic, a festival of wine and food: ``As such, we're thrown together with restaurateurs on a regular basis, the overwhelming majority of whom are very professional and try to do a great job. And I think in justice to the profession of culinary arts, objective reviews are critical. I urge you to continue.''

Jane Gardner, of News Channel 3 (WTKR): ``You have to tell us when things are bad. Otherwise, what good is a review?''

Ruth C. Madden: ``Yes, newspapers should print ALL restaurant reviews. Good restaurants should be acknowledged and bad ones need to be `shaken up'. . . The star rating system is fair, especially when based on more than one visit.''

Betty Xander of Norfolk said she eats out a lot and thinks that often ``restaurants that have been around a long time and have a reputation tend to slip, particularly with service. . . . So yes, I think it's good to kind of bring 'em up smart a little bit and say, hey, get it together and let's have as decent a restaurant as it used to be.''

Martha Berliner of Virginia Beach encourages The Pilot to do more honest reviews: ``In some instances, what we consider a major problem, your reviewer sometimes . . . well, they just gloss over it or don't even mention it. I think they are very useful, particularly with so many restaurants going in and out of business.''

Dave Hofstetler says that if we're going to print reviews, then print negative ones, too. ``We don't need a glee club that just says everything is great. We need to know which ones are also not great. I think the star system is as fair as anything else.''

And an e-mailer said he appreciates a review that reflects the ``anger and indignation I, too, feel after paying a $70 tab for two (food, drinks, tax and tip) for a meal of mediocre food and indifferent service. . . . We believe, by the way, that many restaurants in this area have a `They're tourists and won't be back' mentality.''

But not everybody favors critical reviews, for a variety of reasons.

Theodore Galanides does not think that one newspaper reviewer can be the sole judge.

``If the restaurant and the food is bad, the public will not go,'' said Galanides. ``The restaurant will eventually fail and be replaced by new owners, staff, chefs, whatever.''

And Catherine Gribbin of Virginia Beach thinks The Pilot should just describe restaurants, not review them. ``From years of reading these, I feel you have never had a truly qualified restaurant reviewer,'' she said.

If we have to review, she said, ``please, no stars . . . just a simple few sentences, what type of restaurant it is, the price and the hours.''

Other readers also offered up suggestions:

If a restaurant receives a negative review (say, less than one star for food), re-review it in three months.

When the reviewer finds poor food or service at a second visit, send in another objective reviewer to see if that person finds the same problems.

First review, if positive, print. First review, if negative, notify the restaurant's management. Allow three months to pass so management can take corrective action. Then visit and review again. If still negative, print it anyway.

Get readers, individually or in groups, to do the reviews.

Make sure the critic ``knows something about food and the preparation and what sort of standards should be there.''

Evaluate accessibility - i.e. handicap parking, handrails, thresholds, wheelchair-accessible restrooms, Braille menus.

I'll give the last word to Anne G. Kramer, who has a hotel-school background, travels extensively and ``I know good food when I eat it.''

``Yes, I strongly feel that the review column should be honest,'' said Kramer. ``Without it standards will go by the wayside. Diners' comments are the report card of the restaurant business. If a restaurant can't serve good food, they should get out of the business.''

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu