Shenanigans in Seattle

• Tweet

• Tweet

Seattle Weekly has pointed out some strange things going on over at The Stranger.

A whiny review of Thomas Street Bistro, a new, pint-sized Capitol Hill eatery, disappeared from The Stranger’s Web site shortly after it was published in the Jan. 3 print edition.

…Even more mysteriously, the restaurant—which writer Chris McCann dubbed “sad,” calling the food “depressing,” and saying it “reminded him of our very limited capacity for transcendence”—then started running quarter-page ads in the very paper that had panned it two weeks before.

Thomas Street Bistro co-owner Adam Freeman says The Stranger agreed to give him “a deal” on advertising—and immediately yank the story from the site—after he complained about the review. Freeman had previously run ads in the paper. (He has also been an advertiser in Seattle Weekly.)

When queried, the newspaper stated they didn’t feel like it was a fair review because it “went against our editorial policy of waiting at least three months before doing a formal review of a new restaurant.” However, Seattle Weekly did a bit of research, and found “that the Stranger’s 3-month “policy” is either newly invented or a complete fiction.”

Since the story broke, The Stranger has now re-posted the original review.

Wow. No wonder our washed up restaurateurs are ending up in Seattle. There is a lot more information at the Seattle Weekly. Well worth a read.

Yesterday, a friend told me about a sales pitch he overheard for a web directory type company, a la CitySearch. One of their selling points was a restaurateur could have negative public comments removed. Apparently the conversation went along the lines of “If you get a negative comment, just let us know and we’ll investigate. Usually they are removed” nudge nudge, wink wink. “We are not like Citysearch.”

Now I understand restaurant owners disliking Citysearch. I think most of the comments are garbage – the frequently come across like someone on a private vendetta. I was having dinner at a bar one time, and listened to the employees talking about their campaign to discredit a competitor by posting negative comments about them on Citysearch. On the rare occasion I visit the site, the first thing I do when I see a comment that seems suspicious is check how many other restaurants the writer has commented on. If there is only one or two, I don’t pay any attention to it.

Negative comments on highly trafficked sites definetly have an impact on a restaurant, so there should be some way of monitoring them. But on the other hand, should a restaurant be able to have anything negative removed? If so, shouldn’t there be a note on the site saying so? I’m not comfortable using any site that allows such editorial controls, but I understand why it is a big selling point.

We tend to have higher caliber readers and more controls on PFD, so phony comments aren’t so much of a problem. I don’t think I’ve deleted a comment in at least four months, and never at the request of a restaurant owner, but still, this has me thinking…

I’m putting up a poll. Should restaurants be allowed to delete negative comments? Take a minute and vote. It should be interesting.