On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Pranesh Prakash <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday 13 May 2010 09:43 PM, Thaths wrote: >> http://beta.thehindu.com/life-and-style/metroplus/article428165.ece >> Would you call that a fair/unbiased review of a restaurant? I can list >> many such infractions in reviews of shopping malls, theaters, >> restaurants, jewelery stores, etc. > > A fair/unbiased review of that restaurant? Why not? Not every beat > reporter has high standards and a press release forming the major part > of a report is not unheard of. > 1. What makes you suspect unfairness/bias?
Because, according to the review, there was not one thing that the reviewer did not like about the restaurant. > 2. Point out *any* newspaper *anywhere* in the world with a > city-focussed supplement, and I will point out at least one such article > in that supplement. I was tempted to pull a couple of reviews from the NYT. But knowing that that would open me up for allegations of elitism and "yes... but what about *ordinary* newspapers", I picked http://www.mountainview.net/dining/petit.html "The wine list is one sticking point: The bistro could use a better selection, with a couple of more moderately priced California vintages." ... "The latter, a hefty slab of smooth and musky pâté, was haloed in crushed pistachios and napped on a bed of butter lettuce among cabbage pillows and crunchy gherkins. It was good, but, alas, pistachio proved to be a two-edged blade: A little is divine, a lot is disastrous. Needless to say, the pistachio oil overpowered the duck liver." > It is not 'biased' but (perhaps) shoddy. There is a world of a > difference. And why would you expect though-provoking food criticism > from any city supplement? Perhaps it is shoddy rather than biased. My problem is that there is not even a semblance of objectivity. Thaths -- "Lisa, Vampires are make-believe, like elves, gremlins, and Eskimos." -- Homer J. Simpson Sudhakar Chandra Slacker Without Borders
