How a restaurant critic writes an ethical review
Journalists strive to be fair — and the newspaper’s team of critics is no exception
This story is part of the Star’s trust initiative, where, every week, we take readers behind the scenes of our journalism. This week, we focus on how Amy Pataki, the Star’s restaurant critic, makes efforts to be fair in her reviews.
Fairness is a principle to which journalists at the Star strive to adhere — and the newspaper’s team of critics is no exception. Amy Pataki, who has been reviewing restaurants for the Star for 15 years, says she believes being fair to the chefs and establishment owners she writes about is key to presenting the most objective reviews possible.
What does the term “fairness” mean in a journalistic context?
The “Fair Play” section of the Toronto Star’s Newsroom Policy and Journalistic Standards Guide states that the newspaper must obtain and publish all sides of stories it covers. “Before publication, every effort must be made to present subjects with all accusations — the sooner the better. If an individual cannot be reached or refuses to comment, the story must state this and if applicable report any reasons why the opportunity to comment was refused,” the guide says.
Pataki says she takes this responsibility seriously and has implemented a number of steps in her criticism to ensure she is always fair to the people she writes about.
First, for a full review, she will make at least two visits to the restaurant on different days — usually one on a weeknight, when crowds tend to be smaller, and one on a weekend, when things can get busy.
“Even if a restaurant is a little wobbly on my first visit, I always go back. You want to make sure you’re not catching the restaurant on a bad night,” she said in an interview. “Sometimes one meal is good and one meal is bad, so I’ll even go back for a third meal for a tiebreaker just to make sure.”
When it comes to choosing restaurants to review, Pataki says she relies on recommendations from colleagues, family and friends, and her own explorations of the GTA. She also keeps tabs on developments in the restaurant world that are newsworthy, such as the opening of a new establishment, chef changes or a rebranding. Venturing out to restaurants across the GTA, she says, reflects the breadth of the Star’s readership.
The second step Pataki takes to be fair is to always conduct a phone interview with the chef or owner before going to print in order to check facts and to allow them to address any concerns she has about the food.
“I want to give the reader that transparency to hear what the chef
“I want to give the reader that transparency to hear what the chef or restaurant owner had to say.” AMY PATAKI STAR RESTAURANT CRITIC
or restaurant owner had to say, to explain why the steak was overcooked, or why we had to wait 30 minutes for our entrée, for example,” Pataki said.
“I’m aware that if I have printed a negative review of a restaurant, it impacts their bottom line. It makes the people who work there feel bad and may insult the taste of those who are fans of that restaurant. So I always give the other side a chance to be heard.”
She says out of the approximately 1,300 restaurants she’s reviewed, only on two occasions has a chef expressed anger. “Just last month, I told a chef I had problems with his food, and he ripped into me and then hung up the phone.”
Pataki didn’t mention that in her review, as she felt the chef’s behaviour was irrelevant to the readers’ dining experience.
“People may think I’m a harsh critic, but I’m more likely to give an extra half-star than I am to take it away. I’m cognizant that these are real people and this is their livelihood,” she said.
Third, she will assess the restaurant by its own standards, she says. For example, sushi restaurant Skippa tries and succeeds to fill the gap between a cheap and cheerful place such as Sushi on Bloor and a highend sushi bar such as Yasu, she says. Pataki rated Skippa four out of four stars for meeting that goal.
“This is a subjective experience I’m having. I’m trying to make it as objective as possible,” she said.
“You can be a four-star pizza place, as long as you’re making outstanding pizza!”
To ensure fairness to her readers, Pataki always dines out anonymously, often employing a variety of disguises. The idea is that in order to craft a fair review, she should be treated like any other diner and not the Toronto Star’s restaurant critic.
“I am a mystery eater. I am standing in for Joe Average. So when I get bad service, I’m very happy. It means I haven’t been recognized,” she said. “I like to think of my role as a public service — is this restaurant worth going out for $150 and paying for parking and babysitting, or is it not?” Email your questions to trust@thestar.ca.