thecriticalcouple
  • Home
  • The Food Blog
  • CC Cocktails
  • Wellbeing
  • Other Stuff
  • Contact

Are you sharing the restaurant with an annoying food blogger?

10/6/2012

26 Comments

 
Picture
We recently published a piece on our website titled In Defence of Food Blogs which has given rise to more comments on the post than anything we've written before. While there has been strong support for the article, there was also of course some push back with by far and away the most popular theme being that bloggers are ruining the dining experience for others. While the complaint confuses the principle of blogging against the way that the activity is carried out, it nevertheless raises a separate but still interesting question: how likely is it that your meal will be disturbed by bloggers?

Our conclusion, which we lay out below suggests that you probably haven't been disturbed by food bloggers that much, if at all. You might well have been disturbed by Twitter, Facebook and Blackberry addicts sharing the minutiae of their lives with their friends as it happens (including their meal) or through workers answering an office email, but there's less than a 2% chance that a blogger is also in the restaurant when you eat there. In fact below, we estimate that in the course of a year, for a diner eating out once every week, the odds that you've shared the restaurant with a food blogger on five occasions and noticed is also just 2%. 

If you think that food bloggers are always ruining your meal then you are either:
  1. married to one, 
  2. paranoid, or 
  3. a very unlucky person. 

Or possibly all of the above; read on.

To help answer the question of how often you do in fact share a restaurant with a food blogger, we turned to food blog aggregator site Urbanspoon that lists a staggering 537 food blogs that have posted a London restaurant review. We've then taken a sample of 20 restaurants that includes 3 stars, 2 stars, 1 star and no star restaurants. Some are recent openings and would be considered blogger favourites (Roganic, Zucca), others are London classics (The Ledbury, Savoy Grill, Caprice) and some are just seemingly unpopular (anything by Gary Rhodes). In our sample shown in the table to the right, the average number of blogger reviews per restaurant is 26.1.

We note that reviews start appearing around 2007 though clearly have gained in popularity but the past three years captures the approximate period over which most of these reviews have been posted. Now, if we assume that a restaurant undertakes one lunch and one dinner service five days each week, clearly there are 10 services a week, so 500 a year. If we assume as above that the blog posts have accumulated over the past three years, that is 1,500 services.

Very simply, 26 blog posts per restaurant over 1,500 services means that during any one service, there is only a 1.74% chance that a blogger is in a restaurant with you, or turning that around, there's a 98.3% chance there are no bloggers in the restaurant at all. If you prefer odds, ahead of turning up to a restaurant, there's only a 1-57 chance you will be sharing with a blogger.

Of course, those 1.7% chances mount up so below we've shown a graph on the probability of sharing a restaurant with a food blogger if eating out repeatedly. The x-axis plots the number of times you visit restaurants (perhaps in a year), the y-axis the probability that you'll meet a blogger during that period. The blue line shows the probability that you'll share a restaurant with a blogger during one outing that year, the red line the probability that you share on two occasions, and the green line that you will likely share three times.

Briefly then, if you eat out at restaurants that are bloggable (so excluding most pubs and chains) once every two weeks, there's a 34% chance that by the end of the year you will have shared a restaurant with a blogger. There's only a 13% chance that you shared a restaurant with a blogger on two occasions and less than a 5% chance you hit three bloggers. Eating out 50 times a year, so once a week, those percentages move to 58%, 34% and 19.9% respectively. 

One in three individuals who eat out every week will go the whole year and never share a restaurant with a blogger!  

Probability of there being a blogger in the same restaurant as you per year versus number of times you eat out 

Picture
Even in the new blogger magnets like Roganic, there has been just 30 reviews in the year, so even here then, just a 6% chance that there was a blogger present (more than 17-1 against). 

But if anything, overall, these probabilities overstate the fact since i) outside of London the probabilities of meeting bloggers will be much less, ii) not all bloggers are annoying or they may be far enough away from you that you don't even know they are there and iii) turning tables means there is more likely 15 services a week than 10. If only 50% of bloggers are annoying and we assume three services a day not two, the probability of a person person who eats out every week in a year being annoyed by a blogger on one occasion in that year is 19.5%, twice 11.4% and three times just 6.6%. 

In conclusion then, people who complain about their restaurant experiences continually being ruined by bloggers are almost certainly very much mistaken. It is estimated that half of all adults in the UK now own a smartphone with 64% of all UK internet users on Facebook: new media users might be ruining your restaurant visit but there is a 98.3% chance it's not a food blogger.  

26 Comments
Fiona Maclean link
10/6/2012 02:24:14 pm

Great post...I'd just add one more category to the people being annoyed by bloggers...journalists. But then I guess as a newbie blogger I'm allowed to be non-pc:)

Reply
Fiona Maclean link
10/6/2012 02:26:21 pm

Apologies, just read the link to your previous post and see you have the journo issue nicely covered;)

Reply
samphire and salsify link
10/6/2012 02:29:40 pm

Very good indeed! Big up the bloggers! What I find interesting is how could a blogger possibly ruin someone's meal? By taking photos? It's hardly noticeable I find

Reply
Karin@yumandmore link
10/6/2012 10:55:20 pm

Yes I don't understand that part either.
can anyone explain?

Reply
Ozzy link
10/6/2012 03:04:08 pm

On Tuesday, I jokingly complained to Mark at Alimentum for serving a lot of dishes in deep bowls which made it hard to take a photo while sitting down. ;)

Reply
I Live in a Frying Pan link
10/6/2012 09:52:27 pm

Love the detailed analysis, that's really commendable that you went out and calculated the probabilities! I think your last conclusion rings true to my own experience as well, that much of the disturbance is really from photo enthusiasts and new media users, not necessarily always bloggers.

Reply
Krista link
11/6/2012 03:15:23 am

This is awesome. I love maths, and it's been what I've been saying to people for ages. Bloggers are not ruining anyone's meals. (And I think most of us bloggers would agree--we don't use flash. Whites out the food.) Great stuff. Retweeted, shared, etc. xx

Reply
Liv link
11/6/2012 04:31:45 am

I think this might just be my favourite food blog post on any blog ever. Brilliant! Good on you guys for taking on the haters! x

Reply
leaf (the indolent cook) link
11/6/2012 05:09:19 am

Cool numbers! Just read your previous post regarding this issue and found it well-written, too. The presence of food bloggers should be the least of our worries, really. I agree that the only time it could be annoyingly disruptive is if you were eating with a particularly zealous food blogger. But you could say the same about a particularly zealous smartphone user, or anything else, pretty much.

Reply
The Greedy Sheik
11/6/2012 06:40:03 am

This follows nicely from your previous posts. I guess we all want to enjoy a meal out and not have some a**e spoil it - whether by phonecalls, loud conversation - or photos.

I take all my photographs on a compact - flash off and it's fine except in really dark restaurants (Sat Bains)- I have a large dslr but would rate that as intrusive. I see the Skinny Bib uses a phone and his photos are fine.

The guff about food blogs is exactly that. I don't write because I can't be bothered but I enjoy reading yours and other food blogs. I don't have to read them but I choose to.

For your next survey perhaps try asking people who do take photos what they use the photos for.........best wishes J

Reply
Gary Anderson
11/6/2012 07:58:35 am

I think that anyone who asserts that food bloggers ruin meals or eating out in general are misguided, this likely to be due to one or two negative experiences.

Last year, eating at Le Champignon Sauvage one fellow diner took every photo with a flash. Obviously this was a slight annoyance but I still left the restaurant having enjoyed the meal - best I have eaten in the UK actually - nor did I automatically tar every food blogger with the same brush.

Boarding a flight back to the UK recently, two middle aged ladies on spotting young family with a baby grumbled to each other "I do hope the parents don't allow it to cry all the way" - probable instinct reaction likely to have been drawn from one bad experience.

The fact is, we could all be surrounded by bloggers in every restaurant we eat yet it would appear that the vast majority (including IMO the 2 most important food blogs in England - CC and Andy Hayler) are discrete with photography.



Reply
Detective Chow link
12/6/2012 05:42:06 am

Most bloggers would avoid flashes etc. So I think that, if you're being annoyed by someone in a restaurant, it's probably not a food blogger. It's just someone sharing a little too much.

Unless you're annoyed by people analyzing their dishes. In which case - yup, it's probably a blogger. Talk to them. You might learn something. If not, you can feel pleased that you made their night.

Reply
Alan spedding ( cumbriafoodie ) link
12/6/2012 09:37:12 am

Loving the stats ;-)

Reply
Toby
16/10/2012 05:33:51 pm

Having followed your blog for a while and eaten at several of the restaurants covered in this blog recently, it's become apparent to me that the level of food and service you receive is not an accurate representation of what a "normal" diner might receive. Of course the alternative is that I've just been rather unlucky with my own visits. This is not intended as a criticism of the excellent reviews on your blog but rather a general observation of a disparity between the documented experiences of high profile bloggers (your blog being pne of several) and those of more average/anonymous status.

Reply
thecriticalcouple
17/10/2012 02:32:07 am

Toby,

thanks for your comments and I understand and have sympathy with what you are saying. The one thing we do with the blog post is to put the disclosure box at the bottom so you can see whether we paid for the meal, given free items and even if they knew we were bloggers. We hope this helps the reader a little bit in deciding whether we received 'normal' treatment or not.

Reply
Bedd Gelert
27/1/2013 01:34:52 pm

I can't believe there is even a debate about the acceptability of people using cameras in restaurants.

It is rude, vulgar, discourteous, disgusting, uncivilised and uncouth.

If I went to a restaurant where someone was taking pictures of the food I would ask the waiters to get them to stop. If they didn't I would ask that they be turfed out. .

Either they go or I go, it is as simple as that. The idea that they can get away with ruining other people's evening with impunity is shocking.

Restaurants should make it clear that if someone starts taking pictures of the food and annoying other diners, they will be asked to leave - IMMEDIATELY. No ifs, no buts, no exceptions.

Reply
thecriticalcouple
27/1/2013 01:48:18 pm

Bedd,

how exactly does someone on the other side of the room using a camera ruin your meal?

If they are using an iPhone camera, can you tell if they are taking pictures or sending a text?

Should iPhones be banned from being used in restaurants?

Is a businessman using a Blackberry to send messages to his office during lunch as bad as an iPhone user taking pictures?

Would you demand that a customer who is a bit drunk be turfed out, for surely to be drunk in a restaurant is rude, vulgar, discourteous, disgusting, uncivilised and uncouth also.

In a Chelsea starred restaurant the other day, two nannies who lunch let their young charges play hand held video games at the table for the duration of their visit, would you demand they are thrown out too?

And what about young lovers getting a bit frisky with each other at the table?

Do see also my later post on the subject:

http://www.thecriticalcouple.com/13/post/2013/01/restaurants-more-popular-than-the-internet.html

Reply
Bedd Gelert
28/1/2013 02:26:27 pm

You are resorting to the usual retarded defence of the scoundrel which is that because everyone else is behaving abysmally, it is quite alright for you to do so also. It most assuredly is not.

When travelling on a train many people behave disgracefully by playing loud music, eating food, putting their feet on seats, swearing and talking on phones in the 'Quiet Carriage".

All of these are reprehensible and indefensible, but when challenged all will rely on the defence that 'everyone else is doing it, so it's all right, innit'. And all will seek to say that the victim of this rudeness and discourtesy is the problem, not them. No it is not.

If you want to be uncivilised, sad and discourteous by filming your meal, be my guest - but don't ever ask me to condone that selfish behaviour, or pretend that it is somehow my problem, or ask me to reduce my standards of etiquetted and manners to your gutteral level.

Thecriticalcouple
28/1/2013 04:42:52 pm

Your reply is excellent in technique but pathetic in substance, relying only on rhetoric and misdirection. You accuse us of a line of argument that we have never stated: we have never said taking pictures is okay because other people are behaving badly. We believe there is nothing wrong with taking pictures absolute. Other behaviours might or might not remain bad. You meanwhile fail to answer the question we put to you:

I ask you why your meal is ruined by someone 50 feet away using a camera, you simply don't answer.

Indeed, you state that it is beyond debate that using a camera is rude but offer no support to the argument.

You state it all as fact. Your comments are loaded with a staggering arrogance, a personality trait that is substantially more repellent than taking pictures of a plate of pasta with an iPhone I would suggest. Are you really so consumed by what the people at the next table are doing, or the table at the other end of the restaurant? Really?

To believe that your own relative value is an absolute truth is the way of a tyrant. You might not want to look at pictures of food, you might not choose to look at food blogs, and that of course is your choice. But assuming that your relative value system is beyond debate? Well, that's simply beyond belief.

tcc
28/1/2013 05:00:22 pm

"and all will seek to say that the victim of this rudeness and discourtesy is the problem"

ps, congrats on the rhetorical device of calling yourself a victim: I am a victim of someone taking a picture his food.

Reply
tcc
28/1/2013 06:22:35 pm

pps, I know that when you accused our manners of being 'guttural' you meant to suggest that our manners were in fact in the gutter. Sadly...  guttural does in fact mean 'of the throat'.

Accordingly, should we by some unplanned diversion find ourselves in the gutter (with or without a camera), our guttural manners would be safe from drowning in effluent, being at least four feet clear of the offending waste, assuming it reaches modestly above the ankles. Sorry to disappoint.

Reply
Bedd Gelert
29/1/2013 11:12:36 am

Touche pussycat !!

I suspect we are going to have to agree to differ on this.

My wider point, which I strangely suspect you might have some sympathy with, is that people might use similar arguments to yours for using mobile phones to 'tweet' in cinemas.

I'm sure that you wouldn't because you would acknowledge that this might be disruptive. People also eat food in cinemas, talk, text, surf the web and they think it's okay, because it's what they're used.

Whatever our views of that behaviour, and whether we just 'tut', ask staff to intervene, get angry or think they are selfish moronic imbeciles, the result is just the same - people 'vote with their feet' and don't go to the cinema.

And that is a matter of fact, rather than an opinion about the behaviour. Indeed it is noticeable recently that with the increase in digital downloads, and the inseparability of teenagers from their tablets, that young people attending cinema has started to fall, and the film industry has seen a gap in the market for the 'grey pound' as the amount of disruption has decreased.

I can understand that you are trying to increase the benefit of eating out by decreasing the risk of a rubbish meal, but I have to emphasise, as strongly as I can, that just as some people only go to the cinema, many couples eat out only on 'special occasions'.

Whilst you may be part of a small band of bloggers who are in essence 'amateur journalists', if we let the genie out of the bottle so that every meal eaten out is captured for facebook then we will for a long time have ruined the unique experience of eating out which is surely what you are trying to promote. All the best.

Reply
Luminous Printing link
11/1/2022 09:38:27 am

Great post! We adore this blog and This information is very good.Luminous T-Shirt Printing best T-shirt printing service provider.<a href="https://www.luminousprinting.com.sg/">T-Shirt Printing Singapore</a>
<a href="https://www.luminousprinting.com.sg/">T-Shirt Printing</a>

Reply
Sophia link
28/4/2022 04:18:26 am

Thanks for the information. For the best american restaurant, visit Fielding's Wood Grill now!

Reply
Wishours link
7/7/2022 10:17:47 am

Hi Dear,
I'm glad I found this web site so we are provide Send delicious cake to your friends and family.
<a href="https://wishours.com/">Cake in Varanasi</a>

Reply
helene link
31/10/2022 08:29:30 am

fantastic post very useful thanks

Reply



Leave a Reply.

We're all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. (Oscar Wilde)