On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:38:08 +1200, bob >
wrote:

>On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:25:33 +1200, bob >
>magnanimously proffered:
>
>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/s...0449681&pnum=0
>>
>>Restaurants Story
>>
>>Reviewers criticise at their legal peril
>>5:00AM Thursday July 05, 2007
>>By David Usborne
>>
>>Everybody wants to be a critic, but be warned. Praise what you see -
>>or taste - and the creator will love you forever. Slam it, however,
>>and they might just try to bite back.
>
>Seems like an epidemic:
>
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/...104023,00.html
>
>Critics up in arms as restaurant review judged defamatory
>
>What does this mean for restaurant critics? Read Matthew Evans' full
>review and have your say on our food blog.
>
>Barbara McMahon in Sydney
>Friday June 15, 2007
>Guardian Unlimited
>
snip
>Awarding the restaurant only nine points out of 20, he concluded that
>"more than half the dishes I've tried at Coco Roco are simply
>unpalatable", and that the food was overpriced.
>
>Coco Roco closed three months after the review and the owners, who had
>spent more than A$3m (£1m) refitting the restaurant blamed it on the
>reviewer, saying that customers had been put off by Evans's words.
>
Seems like they are shooting the messenger! Customers would have
reached that conclusion too. In fact, it may have hung on a bit
longer than it should have due to being mentioned at all. Restaurant
critics do not make or break restaurants, but they do advertize them
for free.

--

History is a vast early warning system
Norman Cousins