For the 101 there’s plenty of writing, but throughout the year I don’t think there’s nearly enough restaurant reviews coming out of LAT.
4 Likes
This is kind of how I’ve always thought of the 101. First 10-20 rankings count. The rest is just any order non-specific. It’s obvious LAT is not going to think long and hard with deciding which two restaurants get number 78 vs 79. Like anyone cares about what soccer team came in 78 vs 79th place? I listened to that air Jordan episode and their heads were popping over some ranking of a restaurant at like 40 being better than number, say, 37 or something.
But Bill is right. You’re going to restaurant 88 because it’s over “lower” ranked 99? No one is going to do that. It doesn’t matter where they are past 25. At that point, it’s more interesting to see variety in the experience of reading it rather than having to read 10 similar Italian restaurants in a row, if they’re literal with ranking it.
1 Like
I don’t get the sense that he’s saying 26-101 are order non specific. Rather, he belabors the specific ranking less after ~25 and relies to an extent on vibes. Based on how I interpret what he’s saying, in his mind, 26 is definitely better than say 99….but 45 is not necessarily better than 46. Of course, if your point is more over the absurdity of people avoiding restaurants because they’re far down the list, then sure I agree that mentality is silly.
2 Likes
I sincerely hope a lot of the negativity towards Addison’s “lack of writing” isn’t carry over from his taking extra caution during the heights of the pandemic. During that time, he did a lot of takeout and wrote about it.
I don’t blame him for not risking viral death for eating at Fuddruckers. He does not deserve criticism over that. It put an end to my food writing days as well, as I was not willing to risk severe illness over it. It wasn’t Eater that made any decision about my contributions, it was me.
4 Likes
I see your point of course but I im not sure see a relationship between that time and the current criticism.
I think “they” don’t doing like doing and/or running reviews as much as they used to.
We used to get 1-2 real reviews a week from LAT in the Gold years and when Addy and Patty first took over. Now it’s all features based around a person or a topic.
3 Likes
i wonder if they see more traffic from it hence leaning more into human interest pieces opposed to straight up reviews.
1 Like
Though clearly the publishers are big on listicles and multi-article features, when Addison’s not working on the 101 or on vacation he writes a review most weeks. E.g. in July he wrote four full reviews plus two more in the Tasting Notes newsletter. Jenn Harris also regularly writes reviews, usually several per column. Lucas Kwan Peterson also occasionally writes a review. Did Gold ever write more than one review a week? I don’t remember that.
1 Like
Yep, but that forces the reader to go looking for the reviews. For a more casual browser, I think those reviews are completely missed. I’d like to see them called out somehow.
I’m wanting a regular review column of affordable, only-in-LA, mom and pop, whatever-you-want-to-call-them places. Highlight two or three per column, with 200-300 words each. Really, LA has so much to offer - let’s get those places on folks’ radar.
4 Likes
I think everything shows up on the Food page.
Yes, but only Addison’s reviews are highlighted in the Restaurant Reviews section (and that’s down the page). Any smaller/shorter reviews are not called out (I’m sure some show up in the various listicles).
For me, the revamped Food Section isn’t appealing. Maybe I’m not the intended audience?
Most of those “short shots” - especially Harris’s - are terrific, but not reviews (at least as I interpret the concept of reviews).
But I love the field work these journalists do.
I also love a more formal review. Or even a pan - not the one you cook in. Nobody in LA does a good take-down these days
4 Likes
The short reviews offer the critics’ opinions of food they ate with some context about the restaurant. Addison’s long reviews just do more of the same. Some of the places covered in the short pieces don’t have long enough menus that a long review would make sense.
1 Like
JGold’s influence, I wager.
1 Like
I wish I could agree, but there was little to no criticism of Addison’s “lack of writing” until he took the pandemic break, which is still rather unfair, because he did a lot of takeout and wrote about it. That the same criticism has persisted since (from the same folks?) makes me seriously wonder and makes me think there is correlation. There were posters here who specifically complained that it was “his job to go in and eat at places”, which makes me doubly wonder about the true motivation of their complaints. It doesn’t come off coincidental.
4 Likes
This is the kind of review I miss. Reading it really takes me through what it’s like to experience a meal there.
4 Likes
"This is kind of how I’ve always thought of the 101. First 10-20 rankings count. The rest is just any order non-specific. "
This is so blatantly disrespectful. Do you think ALL rankings are decided this way? Or just specifically shitting on Bill?
Your nasty, argumentative tone isn’t contributing anything positive to this board. Please change your attitude or go away.
Addison’s own comment about ranking is pretty definitive.
2 Likes