OK, let me see if I have this straight:
1) Influence/relevance of newspaper reviews of restaurants has declined in recent years what with blogs/Eater/Grub St./Yelp/TripAdvisor.
2) But, lead restaurant critic for the NY Times remains a prestigious gig, and so newspaper restaurant reviews remain a thing.
3) In what looks like a gambit for attention, restaurant critic for NY Times reviews TV celebrity's crappy Times Square restaurant, gets tons of traffic.
4) In face of ongoing decline of interest in broadsheet restaurant reviews, reviewer goes back to the well, and reviews another crappy Times Square restaurant.
5) Second crappy Times Square restaurant goes out of business, and our reviewer plays it for yuks.
6) I don't think that our reviewer is responsible for the Times Square location of Senor Frogs's shutting down, but considering that the entire connection between the critic and the restaurant is a result of the struggle of print journalism to stay relevant, it seems sort of tacky to react like this.
7) FWIW, if your broker calls and asks if you want to put your pension in NY Times stock, or Senor Frog's, my advice would be to stick with the margaritas.
Comments