The ethics of food blogging
May 1st, 2009 by Besha Rodell in Food mediaThis post just went up on the New York Times Diner’s Journal blog about the ethics of food blogging. In it, Kim Severson asks “Should a food blogger follow the same ethics as a traditional food journalist?”
I have so much to say on this topic I should probably muzzle myself to keep from making this an all-out rant. I will say that it must be difficult for non-professionals to navigate what’s ethical and what’s not when many traditional food journalists push the ethical boundaries (media dinners, freebies etc.). But disclosure is key, and I applaud any effort to give guidance on that front.
May 1st, 2009 at 3:14 pm
I think this is of great value. I’ve wondered about how to approach certain posts and this provides great clarification and ethical standards.
“Freebies” are a reality and lately I haven’t been sure about how to handle that. On one hand, bloggers don’t have anyone to fit the bill but themselves, and a freebie makes it more possible to hit up as many spots and offer up opinion as much as possible, but on the other hand a conflict of interest can be inferred.
If the opinions are real, to me, it shouldn’t matter, but will anyone ever believe you even if they are?
I think all bloggers should use implement this code of ethics but would be interested to hear the thoughts of the professional food writers on this topic.
May 1st, 2009 at 3:50 pm
I understand that freebies are a reality, and in some cases the only way to keep up with all the new restaurants. Many “traditional” journalists go to media dinners, etc (We at CL don’t). Here’s what should be done under those circumstances: if you’re writing about a meal you got for free, you absolutely need to disclose that fact. Then the reader can decide for themselves if you’re biased.
May 1st, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Oh I absolutely agree regarding disclosure, but even when doing so, what is the outside perception (from readers and from pros)?
that’s what I struggle with
May 1st, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Honestly, my perception is that the experience will be skewed if the meal was free, and not just for the obvious reasons. There’s no doubt it’s harder to be critical of what’s basically a gift, but apart from that, the restaurant is going to be extra careful to give the best its got during media dinners and the like. It’s part of why anonymity is so crucial in my mind for a professional restaurant critic. But even if a critic or blogger is recognized, the restaurant generally doesn’t have the time to prepare and fuss the way they do for such dinners.
I do see a culture of “you scratch my back I’ll give you free food” in the food blogging world, and I find it disheartening. But it’s also incredibly tempting for the average blogger.
If the disclosure is there though, like I said, then readers can decide for themselves. There are far worse practices in some print media (editorial coverage in exchange for advertising dollars, etc).
May 1st, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Good points Besha, I appreciate your thoughts.
May 1st, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Not sure if you saw this: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124045072480346239.html#mod=rss_Personal_Journal
May 2nd, 2009 at 12:14 am
This is tough to keep brief as well-
The wine world is buzzing lately with similar issues– The Wine Advocate (Robert Parker), a long preacher of ethics, a pure consumer advocate, refusing to have relationships with the trade, accepting no junkets– They had often attacked other writers and publications for accepting hospitality / travel, fees paid, etc… Well, low and behold, the Wine Advocate had been receiving similar treatment as well. They have a strict code of ethics, but I guess it was meaningless.
I’m not saying this to defend bloggers, but I think bloggers are comped less frequently than food critics are recognized. Though a restaurant doesn’t always have time to quickly prepare a critic’s meal, didn’t CL write last year that restos often produce multiple entrees and deliver the best to the critic? Isn’t that preferential treatment?
I’m all for people doing what is right and being clear on what was received for free- but a professional journalistic code, creed, or a seal of approval, doesn’t cut it for bloggers. 99% of bloggers are not pros. They are people writing for the love of it, doing it on their own dime (mostly), and spending their own uncompensated time. I think readers can detect bs and make their own decisions.
Should publications cease to accept ad revenue from places they review? That too comes across as bias.
I’m not attacking CL or critics, but I think the issues on the blog side are no more than on the print side. The difference- amateurs vs pros.
May 2nd, 2009 at 10:11 am
Although not a full-time food blogger, I have blogged a few reviews about meals in various restaurants. In some of those restaurants I was well-known as a loyal customer, and in others I was just the random guy. Even though I do this just for my own enjoyment (and hopefully the enjoyment of some of my readers), I do feel obligated to mention conflicts of interest, and would never accept freebies as any kind of quid pro quo (implied or otherwise). That would seem to fly in the face of anyone’s ability to provide objective commentary or reviews. Doesn’t this seem obvious?
May 2nd, 2009 at 10:31 am
I hear ya, Dirty. It’s a complex issue. I do want to respond though to the idea that accepting ad revenue from restaurants comes across as a bias. The hard part for the public is recognizing when there is a conflict and when there isn’t – I like to state our policies on this matter as much as I possibly can, not to pat ourselves on the back but because too often this kind of thing is not transparent enough.
At CL, and at most reputable media organizations, there is an iron curtain between sales and editorial. I don’t know who’s advertising with us and who isn’t. (yes, I could comb the paper and look for ads, but I do have better things to do). The paper is super protective of my autonomy on this issue – we recognize that my credibility is way more valuable to the paper than trying to please individual clients. Quite honestly, if I ever hear rumors from the sales side it’s that some client is mad that we gave them a less-than-favorable review. I wonder how often that happens to bloggers who have been comped? The key is in the separation – I can’t be biased if I don’t know who’s benefiting. (In recent years this has actually become an issue for our sales team, who are now competing with publications that DO offer editorial perks for ad dollars. Restaurants have come to expect such treatment. It’s depressing.)
For readers, it has to be about trust and credibility. As critics, we need to build trust over time – I think that a body of work showcases bias or credibility. The same is true for bloggers. The bloggers in this town who get the most respect are the ones out there looking for the new find, directing people to things us in the mainstream media miss, making observations that are unique. Bloggers who just talk up the newest, hottest restaurants get far less attention and props from what I can tell.
As indicated by Jimmy’s posts, there’s a faction of the blogging community that IS concerned about the appearance of bias, about credibility. For those folks, guidelines can only serve to help.
May 2nd, 2009 at 10:59 am
Besha-
I don’t doubt CL’s position w/ regards to division between sales and editorial That’s why I still read you every week, and why I read certain blogs regularly.
(In my late note post above, I should have typed–”Should publications cease to accept ad revenue from places they review? That can be PERCEIVED as bias.” ) My answer to that is yes, pubs should still accept ads from them, but that is a perception issue that all media has to deal with, and all blogs have to deal with the credibility issue. A seal or code won’t fix that, only good reputation and content.
The wine blog side deals w/ the same issues. There are tons of catfish out there who give every importer or winery sample glowing praise, want to be the first review (so don’t let their bottles rest after receiving them), and treat the “gravy train” of wine samples as the reward / compensation for their work…
On that note- does anyone want to review some Pinotage for me? I wonder if they read my site before sending wine…..
May 2nd, 2009 at 12:18 pm
I think these guidelines/code of ethics are a great idea for bloggers—like myself—that did not study journalism, but still strive to be credible writers and reviewers.
When it comes to accepting free meals, products, etc., I just don’t do it. I went to a couple of media dinners when I first started my blog 4 years ago and they left me feeling conflicted (and kind of dirty). I didn’t write about those two restaurants and haven’t been to any such events since. I realize it is hard for most restaurant bloggers to resist since we foot the bill for our eating, but it absolutely muddies your credibility no matter how much you disclose to your readers.
It’s a sad reality that hyper-local restaurant review blogs simply cannot pull in enough advertising to compensate you for what you spend. But you simply have to do it because you love it. I realize my situation is a little different since I blog and get paid to write. But I don’t think I would have been hired if my editors didn’t feel I was a conscientious and responsible writer. Like anything in life, your reputation is all you have.
Another large issue facing the blogging community is attribution. There are bloggers/websites out there that poach content from bloggers and fail to attribute. This is a huge problem for those of us who work hard at creating original content. I can’t tell you how many times I have found my content on another site even though I do have a copyright in place. It’s maddening. Do I use photos or write about items I’ve found on other websites? Sure. But I always ask for permission and/or give credit. Many writers—both bloggers and professionals—don’t.
I could go on and on since the gray area is still so vast. But I applaud these girls for taking the initiative to get the conversation going. It’s a much-needed step in the right direction.
May 2nd, 2009 at 2:05 pm
What about hyping Asian restaurants (Tasty China, Delicious Kebob) on restaurant forums, organizing group meals etc. and in exchange receiving free tipless meals without disclosure? Then posting raves about those free meals (pictures too) and not disclosing those meals free?
I hear this happens around town.
May 2nd, 2009 at 7:08 pm
I have no idea what Asian Food Lover is talking about, but I will say that I don’t require a free meal to say great things about TC and DK!
May 3rd, 2009 at 9:43 am
This topic is boring, please update with a new topic.
May 4th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
A problem with expecting bloggers to be journalists is that there is a continuous spectrum of blogs ranging from “This is what I had for dinner last night, and I don’t care if anyone else ever reads this,” to those that try to emulate what has traditionally been put out in printed publications. Some bloggers are in reality aspiring journalists and relish the idea of adhering the ethics and guideliness that go with that endeavor. Others couldn’t care less and shouldn’t be expected to. Where in the spectrum does any given blog fall, and thus what should be expected of it, is an impossible can of worms. I am afraid that on-line publishing has forever blurred the concept of journalism, and there’s no going back. Anything found on the Web, and indeed many things found in print, should be read with a grain of salt, and no blog should be expected to abide by any particular rules or ethics, short of violating the law.
May 4th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
The same could be said of journalists – some are serious, some don’t care. Ethics are ethics in my book, and if you get free stuff you should disclose it, whether you aspire to be a journalist or not. The real issue, and what I see this as trying to address, is that those of us who are employed by a media organization have that institution’s policies to guide us. Bloggers don’t – I see this as more of a community service, trying to help the blogging community, than a restriction or creativity killer.
These guidelines are not asking people to stop writing about what they want to. It’s not some kind of soul police. What’s the harm?
May 6th, 2009 at 9:09 am
I had an interesting experience relative to all of this recently.
I was in the restroom at La Pietra Cucina last Friday when the bill came for my lunch with two friends. As it turned out, Chef Bruce Logue had comped our meal.
I protested A LOT, but my friends wouldn’t agree to pay and, rather than causing a scene, I decided to accept it. There are not words for how much I hate that.
Years ago, when I would visit Bien Thuy, a fabulous Vietnamese restaurant that closed, the owner (who collaborated on a cookbook with our critic of the time, Terrell Vermont), would never let me pay for a meal. In this case, my protests were clearly considered rude, so I always left a tip equal to the cost of the meal.
Suzanne, the owner, was also in the habit of giving me gifts — including a gigantic gold bracelet emblazoned with the word “LUCKY”. It prompted friends to call me Mr. T every time we went to the restaurant. I had to wear it because Suzanne got very hurt if I didn’t.
Disclosure is the only way to deal with this, but readers need to understand that in some cases, there is a cultural phenomenon at play.
May 6th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
egullet weighs in: http://tinyurl.com/dksume
May 14th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
While guidance is good, I don’t think that is what the Food Blog Code of Ethics is providing – they are creating a (possibly-self-serving) code that people will sign on to. I’d much rather see people take inspiration from this and make their own ethical statements relevant to their own blogs.