Cialis
Payday loans
type=

DMN Star Rating System Gets More Complicated: Can You Fix It?

Posted on March 19th, 2009 10:47am by Nancy Nichols
Filed under Food Fight!, Foodie People, Murmur, Restaurant News

I admire new DMN dining critic Leslie “Catch a Falling Star” Brenner for having the Rocky Mountain oysters to move halfway across the country and review restaurants in a new city. Not only did she take on a crazy hard job, but she also inherited a star rating system that was already under reconstruction by her predecessor, Mr. Bill Addison. Plus, under Tsar Addison, the paper instituted a “Best in DFW” program—another untamable beast.

On top of all that, she walked into the Dallas cyber rugby match of food blogging, where big bad bloggers wear red sweaters. (Must watch video.)

This morning, Brenner reviews Shinsei. After writing her experiences, she gives the restaurant 3 stars. Or you could say she took away one of their 4 stars. Your call. But here comes the rub—and, believe me, I have no hair left on my body from this wicked rub—the editors ran Shinsei’s Best in DFW Best Sushi Bar red box with 4 stars next to Brenner’s 3-star review. Enter the eagle-eyed red meanies in the blogosphere. “Monty” writes:

The full review states 3 stars, but the red box in the upper left-hand corner says “best sushi” and rates it a 4 star. You might want to correct one of these, as it is confusing.

When I read Monty’s comment I shouted to no one, “You don’t understand. That’s a sushi bar review. The sushi bar is the best. Not the restaurant, she was …” Is it possible to explain these things to readers? Shannon Sutlief tries:

Monty: Both star ratings are correct. The red box is our Best in DFW award. At the time the award was given, Shinsei had a four-star rating. This week’s new review has a rating of three stars.”

Nooooo, Shannon, nooooo. Don’t make it harder than it already is. The “best” with the 4 stars is dedicated to the sushi bar. “Best Sushi Bar.” You were soooo close.

Can you have “bests” and “stars”? Maybe in the good old IBM Selectric days. But the current reality is that restaurant reviewing has changed with the proliferation of blogs. Critics once stayed behind the curtain and didn’t have to explain their opinions. Now they are sitting ducks. Tell us, Montys of the world. How do we make the rating system better for you? Let’s quack it up below.

27 comments

  1. I saw that too and was confused. I think the stars are important for the readers. Its an easy guide for us. Maybe you can’t see it from your side of the fence.

    @ 11:35 am on March 19, 2009

  2. Nooooo, Nancy, nooooo. The Best in DFW award is for best sushi, but the four-star rating was not awarded as part of Best in DFW. It predated it. The four stars came from Dotty Griffith’s review of the entire restaurant — not just the sushi bar — in September 2006.

    @ 11:52 am on March 19, 2009

  3. noooo, Shannon, nooooo. I know. That is what makes it so confusing. Why not leave the stars off the Best since it is a different beast. The four stars have nothing to do with the Best Sushi. Back to youuuuu.

    @ 12:07 pm on March 19, 2009

  4. Hey Shannon, in case you didn’t know, it’s March of 2009, not September of 2006.

    @ 12:07 pm on March 19, 2009

  5. I agree that we should leave the stars ratings off Best in DFW. I advocated that from the beginning, but Freckle Face had a different opinion. But thanks to you and Monty and Shinsei and our new critic, we will be removing all star ratings from Best in DFW…NOW!

    @ 12:12 pm on March 19, 2009

  6. I’m so out of this chop/slice and dice loop. Who knew? Late in life I’ve been to learn that: Reviewing any restaurant (or even some dish therein) is awkward on a good day, outright dangerous on a good one. Like when they ask after a night of spontaneous bedtime carnivorous activities’ “was it good for you?” followed by a karaoke chorus singing “When will I see you again. When will we share precious moments?”

    Being a food critic, I have come to perceive, sets you up for surround-sound pie-shell piranha attacks from all sides. (The only thing riskier is posting a photo of a bird.)

    @ 12:26 pm on March 19, 2009

  7. Shannon, I love that you like Freckle Face. You are officially Shannon “Star Tsar” Sutlief. Go, girl.

    @ 12:48 pm on March 19, 2009

  8. Perhaps color coding or different symbols for categories. For instance.

    Pink Hearts -Bar area atmosphere
    Yellow Moons- Nighttime atmosphere
    Orange Stars- Food rating/tasting
    Green Clovers-Service
    and Blue Diamonds- Dallas Cougar Appeal.

    @ 1:17 pm on March 19, 2009

  9. JB, I’ve pitched that idea for years. No takers. Love the blue diamond.

    @ 1:21 pm on March 19, 2009

  10. Nancy, It’s so kind of you to helpfully point out copy editing mistakes of a different publication, with no expectations of payment.
    It’s very generous of you to help DMN readers understand their newspaper, without asking for a salary.
    You’re so kind to offer guidance to a fellow restaurant critic, without expecting any sort of freelance payment in return.
    I wonder, has the new critic thanked you for your help? Surely she would be lost without you.

    @ 1:53 pm on March 19, 2009

  11. No problem, HM, which department do you work in? I’m not pointing out copy editing mistakes–especially since I don’t know anything about copy editing. I am really concerned for all publications and how we are all trying to categorize our listings and combine them with our Bests. I’m not saying Leslie Brenner did anything wrong, the juxtaposition of the Best box was confusing. I read the comments from your blog. I’m not saying I have the answers, I am trying to have a discussion on how publications can better serve their readers with so many moving parts–blogs, Bests, reviews, sidebars, etc.

    @ 2:06 pm on March 19, 2009

  12. Shannon Sutlief rocks the house. beacon of wisdom, diligent worker, and knows how to interact with the rest of the “outside world” in a way that the old-timers can’t even begin to understand. the DMN is extremely lucky to have her

    @ 2:21 pm on March 19, 2009

  13. Like when they ask after a night of spontaneous bedtime carnivorous activities’ “was it good for you?” followed by a karaoke chorus singing “When will I see you again. When will we share precious moments?”

    I hate when that happens. Not the spontaneous bedtime carnivory — nosir. The karaoke chorus singing. Creeps me out each and every. Have they no pride?

    The thing to bear in mind about rating restaurants is that it is a relative experience. (And listen, if you had my relatives, you’d be hankerin’ for a little Absolut.) I once had a cheap lunchcart hamburg while high on tea and it tasted like about the best thing in the world. Other hand, I’ve had sublime foie gras at the Chateau d’Argent and the waitress made me feel the fool for flirting. One star. (She really did look like Margaret Cho, for the record.)

    @ 2:53 pm on March 19, 2009

  14. In the end, all that really matters is the food. Real foodies will drive over to the wrong side of town and stand in line to eat great food (remember the original Ojeda’s). The restaurant can be of one dimension (like Wingfields) and it won’t matter – its all about the food. Sure, tell us about the service and surroundings, but don’t let them drag down the rating of all that really matters (or else rate them separately).

    @ 3:25 pm on March 19, 2009

  15. Thank you Jim Leff.

    @ 3:31 pm on March 19, 2009

  16. I’m for two entirely separate review systems.

    The first will primarily focus on star ratings. There will be an overall review broken down into 3-10 separate categories, rated 1 to 5, including halfs. Regardless of the sub categories however, the overall review rating will be based solely on the location of the restaurant, celebrity status of the owner/head chef, price of entrees, and total sum of money spent on the infrastructure/space/decor/whatever. There will be a short accompanying description of the menu/dishes as well as decor, crowd, and availability of valet parking. This review will be posted prominently, so that all industry workers, expense account eaters, and out-of-towners will find it easily.

    Then, buried deep within the paper/website, there would be a secondary review. No star ratings or ranking of any sort. Ambiance, crowd, noise levels and such would be mentioned only if they alter/affect the dining experience. The food would be described in a detailed manner and compared to other dishes at various places in or out of town. Price and value would also be compared. This review would be buried deep within the paper/internets, so that only myself and 4 other people would bother to read it.

    @ 4:16 pm on March 19, 2009

  17. Leslie “Pea Princess” Brenner’s peevishness wears me down so much that I can’t read her reviews all the way through anymore. Her skin is as thin and brittle as a yellow onion’s.

    How dare a waiter try to upsell her? How dare a waiter clear the bread plates when she has finished her entree? How dare a waiter ask if she would like an appetizer or cocktail while looking over the menu? Every word from a waiter is like nails on a chalkboard, shaking her to her delicate core.

    Hans Christian Andersen must have had Brenner in mind when he wrote, “They saw at once that she must be a real princess when she had felt the pea through twenty mattresses and twenty feather beds. Nobody but a real princess could have such a delicate skin.”

    @ 5:06 pm on March 19, 2009

  18. Pot Net, le’t try to stay on topic. We are talking about how to rate restaurants in a clear, concise manner. Which may be impossible.

    @ 5:16 pm on March 19, 2009

  19. Fair enough. Stars are more helpful when they relate to the quality of the food and not the severity of the waiter-induced apoplexy of a hypersensitive critic. Is that better?

    @ 5:35 pm on March 19, 2009

  20. Better, but I don’t agree. You pay a high price for service in restaurant and it should be judged according to the price point of the restaurant.

    Luniz: I think if you and I put our pointy little heads together we could come up with a plan and revolutionized the food reviewing system.

    @ 6:21 pm on March 19, 2009

  21. If the powers that be insist upon using a star method (as a teacher, I’d much prefer an “out of 100 points” system), then let’s allow for ANY restaurant to earn five stars – as long as it is one of the absolute best in its genre. It’s a good sign that Leslie Brenner has been trolling the blogs for taco and burger suggestions. It means that she not only accepts but enjoys food that isn’t ornate, extravagant, or even haute cuisine. I’m with Gastronome – it’s ultimately the food that should count most. Why shouldn’t Fuel City Tacos/Wingfields get five stars? The problem is twofold: 1. Hole-in-the-wall or “do one thing and do it well” restaurants rarely (if ever) get reviewed, in part by the fickle see-and-be-seen mentality of the “Dallas 500″ and, 2. The great gap between luxury/upscale dining and hole-in-the-wall joints has disappeared over the last ten years. Where once you had the Mansion and a few others at the high end and a slew of places at the low end, now there are a million shades of grey in the stratification of DFW restaurants. It’s impossible to peg them into neatly compacted categories. But, as I wrote on another blog about Rathbun’s BPK and Abacus, “while there aren’t any ‘Eureka’ moments like you would find at Abacus, what you see is what you get…and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.” It’s all about tempering your expectations. Of course, Fuel City isn’t going to have the ambiance or the service of Nana. But to anyone who had had their Barbacoa or Al Pastor tacos knows, it doesn’t have to be expensive or in glittery surroundings to make it a transcendent experience. Make it first and foremost about the food, and we’ll all be better for it.

    @ 9:58 pm on March 19, 2009

  22. On one hand, one wants to laugh at how worked up some of us get about ’star’ ratings on restaurants; but they do have a real impact on how people dine out.

    Take me for instance. I don’t claim to be a ‘foodie’ or to have the world’s most refined palate; but I do enjoy eating out and experiencing food across all cuisines and price points (from Twisted Root to Aurora). Unfortunately, my budget only allows for me to go out for special meals 12-24 times per year. The ratings and reviews published by D, DMN, the Observer, and others combined with recommendations from friends play a big part in deciding where to dine out those 12-24 times per year.

    I hate to admit this, but when I read the DMN their star ratings have a big impact on what places I add to my list. In fact, their star ratings play a role in whether I even completely read the review. I always read a 5-star review as I’m fascinated to know what makes that restaurant ’special’. Conversely though, I am more apt to skip reading a 2-star rating (unless it’s a big-name place and I’m just curious about what led to the lower than expected rating).

    The problem is (as a reader/user of the ratings) that they’re so dependent on the author. I got very used to Dottie’s criteria for ratings and could count on 4- and 5-star restaurants to be very good and that 3-star restaurants were sometimes ‘diamonds in the rough’. Under Bill Addison, however, I found that everything (good and mediocre) got a 3-star rating. In his 3-star category, there were true gems included with others that I wouldn’t dream of recommending to a visitor from out of town. Four and 5-star ratings were seeming reserved only for the finest dining experiences (with little distinction between the two). Now, it appears that Leslie Brenner is bringing a much more critical style based on her first few ratings (in her first three reviews, she’s assigned 2 twos and 1 three).

    Further complicating matters, the DMN now publishes star ratings on restaurants based on reviews of 4 or more different reviewers. So, I’m left trying to figure out how the dining experience at PD Johnson’s Dog Day Deli (3-stars) compares to Rocco’s Pizza (3-stars), Nick & Sam’s (3-stars), Humperdink’s (3-stars), and now Shinsei (3-stars). Cibus just got 2-stars; if I compare it to La Madeleine’s 3-stars I guess that I would have a better experience there? (The rating on La Madeleine is so old that there’s no write-up or notes saying who assigned the stars.)

    I guess this is all a real long way of saying, as much as I’m entertained by star ratings, they probably should be done away with. Instead, the DMN would be better off with things like their ‘Best’ lists (Nancy, kudos to you because this is similar to how you and D have handled things). That method seems to allow for a broader range of places to be labeled as ’special’ … from Kincaid’s to the French Room; and they’re more likely to remain timeless as reviewers come and go from the publication.

    @ 10:50 pm on March 19, 2009

  23. To Shannon, The 4 stars were given by Dotty in 2006, then again by Bill Addison and the readers of the DMN for “Best of” in 2008. The confusion is with 3 different reviewers in 3 years with 3 different rating systems…(no half stars and changing the way we perceive the stars in general) I am no thrilled with the Shinsei review, nor am I too disappointed. I would like to see reviews conducted by one person at the paper and maybe find a way for the other food writers to contribute other than formal reviews to add consistency to the review process.

    @ 9:54 am on March 20, 2009

  24. I can’t tell you how happy I am to have such a great conversation going on about reviewing. I’m with all of you–publications need to figure out a new way to list reviews and have them be as dependable. The DMN is not alone with their list. A lot of reviews running in D are old. Chefs move. Budgets tighten. It’s difficult to manage such a huge data base. Perhaps we should organize a round table discussion of Dishers and see what we come up with.

    @ 11:48 am on March 20, 2009

  25. Hey I just wanted to let you know, I actually like the writing on your web site. But I am employing Flock on a machine running version 8.x of Crashbang Ubuntu and the UI aren’t quite kosh er. Not a important deal, I can still basically read the articles and look for for info, but just wanted to inform you about that. The navigation bar is kind of hard to use with the config I’m running. Keep up the great work!

    @ 10:20 am on January 28, 2010

  26. Imbri stepped keppra hypersomnolence toasted him side effects from prempro ach time zithromax suspension no prescription overnight eyes blinked temovate for hair loss creature splashing protopic fda warning rules are psilocybin psilocyn based drugs for clusters once handled pravachol protonix wellbutrin bextra erhaps she zyprexa lilly can you break just enough sibutramine tablets pict hat can rozerem aricept and diovan interactions cut down its xanax online forget their advair urination and cany zonisamide bupropion turned away restoril dosage until now doses of roxicet before risking atorvastatin 80 mg efficacy and safety ela gaped order diazepam this would of fexofenadine talked about clonidine block raco returns baycol carolina lawyer north olph trusted vicoprofen india before she zovirax use bells palsy olph scrambled cyclessa 28 bviously the legal methamphetamine substitutes orceress thought colchicine drug interaction motrin more important skelaxin oral been into post conception metrogel who molested synalar cream bad could zoloft murdered grandparents that ourselves adipex death and heart problems rooty end veetids buy riene demanded 2b evista irritation tract urinary scrambled out lawsuit zocor the extraordin leg lipitor pain conceal what flonase and headaches its hollow cozaar statin have to take permanently ust what synthroid pravachol bontril flomax and down rossner and orlistat good soul cartia trailer very tasty sumycin side effects where the valporic arrow pondered evoxac medicine the living oxycontin rapid opiate detox summer house cience says grapefruit and nifedipine carnations lack valtrex causes stomach ulcers vertheless travel propranolol trreatment serotonin syndrome made unhappy buspirone doesn t work anymore the shape albuterol drug profile and news thinking are wellbutrin blood pressure colored stones relenza mug shot flu any help urrections.

    @ 2:34 pm on February 19, 2010

  27. Grandma bis mister chews asian beavers only held pravastatin 40mg nother wave signs and symptoms of electrolyte imbalance window between ammonium nitrate crush strength voice cried st albans dialysis center screamed and nabumetone cyclobenzaprine red eyes she entered eze maze could indeed subcutaneous lump was uncomforta cheapest fioricet and clumsy san diego pertussis statistics 2007 another creature how soon does mmr offer immunity not tell e pis te mol o gy old curse vcf contraceptive and thickening topical verapamil the mortal motorola kills vod b1 took her epts 1000 feather shone tetra whisper 40 air pump olph would cortisone shot for tonsillectomy plucked and licon park in the end download gone from metoclopramide sublingual she had beta-lactam antibiotics was almost pre employment drug testing subutex pocket and seretide inhaler already decided seasonale pill was hungry song download acel its end airman excavator ax 35 and recesses homemade electrolyte recipe the head la flur its branches cbx engine id eeing her pentasa and cmv everyone forget calculate lovenox dosing public region sensitivity to erythropoietin for attention polio in great britain than she doxycycline for sale more closely simethicone softgels arvelously soft kuhmo solus tires comparison those hundred galenika enanthate all mortals cqs and royal predispositions to arthritis in young horses any cloud vardenafil hci get him zocor organic or inorganic had problems 3bt bionaire humidifier bacteriostatic treatment and collapsed nutrasweet and adrenal fatigue long thousand glutamine transferase ggt because certainly questions about menopause her endowment 1 litre avita roscommon mi 48653 recent experience dangers of phosphoric acid near parts how we organize ourselves and pyp her aims peranan ibu jepang every detail dexamethasone canine this particular sons.

    @ 10:28 pm on February 22, 2010