I don’t normally weigh in on the bloggers vs. professional food writers debate because the fact that it’s always framed as a dichotomy seems to me to make any argument pointless considering the fact that many professional food writers have their own blogs; blogs and traditional media are different and for different purposes (though obviously there is a lot of overlap) and often complementary; and that many writers who started as bloggers publish in traditional media too – not to mention that I don’t believe for a minute that one (bloggers) preclude the other (journalists). I read just as many food magazines and books as I ever did and while I suppose “the people I know” don’t constitute a sample group any scientist would take seriously, if they are anything to go by, most other people continue to do so too. Despite not wanting this to turn into an “us versus them” argument, I think because I’m responding to an article which draws that line it’s impossible not to but I’d like to make it clear at the outset that that’s not how I view the world of food writing.

This poorly researched article by Elizabeth Meryment in The Australian managed to stick in my craw; in what seems to be an attempt to file her copy with the minimum of effort and thought while simultaneously creating a stir by polarising readers she trots out trite old arguments which have already been discussed elsewhere endlessly, then parrots A.A Gill who declares of blogs “I don’t read them; I would never read them… As if I have the time.” He nevertheless appears to have time to have strong opinions on them, saying “[Bloggers are] not doing it particularly well.” If he doesn’t read them, I wonder how he knows that is the case – he sounds suspiciously like a kid who “knows” he hates peas.

The fact is, I actually agree with him. In many cases, restaurant review (and other) blogs don’t do it very well but I’ve actually read a lot of them and know that there are also many that have a witty, well-informed and critical take too. Meryment quotes Australian food writer Natascha Mirosch who says that because bloggers might have their own agenda, don’t feel they are bound by the constraints of traditional media and lack transparency about whether or not their meals were paid for by the restaurant they are reviewing, it is dangerous to place trust in their opinions. My reply to this is threefold: Firstly, it’s rather ironic. Surely one of the constraints of traditional media is the onus on a journalist to do good research and know the topic they purport to be writing about – clearly not true in the case of Ms. Meryment herself. Also, the fact that bloggers are not bound by some of those constraints can make for fresh and interesting reviews. However, I also think she is comparing short order cooks to starred chefs when she does so – most well-respected bloggers wouldn’t dream of posting a review without disclosing whether the meal was complimentary. Blogging is still in its teenage-hood but attempts are being made to adhere to a code of ethics and there is plenty of discussion surrounding the topic. The whole thing also elides the fact that journalists in traditional media are also often courted by representatives of those who would have their wares promoted. Is there a person in the world who doesn’t have an agenda? If so I’ve yet to meet one. Surely no-one in this post-modern milieu still believes in the myth of objectivity.

Read more rant here

Tagged as: easy, ice-cream, own recipe, pink peppercorns, quick, sugar

{ Comments on this entry are closed }