|
Will write for food – bloggers, reviewing and the mainstream press |
|
Monday, 31 March 2008 |
|
At the recent Melbourne Food and Wine Festival food bloggers copped a right-royal bagging from assorted panelists and special guests. The main complaint was that since the thoughts published online are not scrutinised and streamlined by qualified editors they are poorly written, waffly, disorganised, long-winded and dull - not to mention uneducated and opinionated to the point of defamatory.
The speakers had a point. The fact that the content of blogs isn't edited allows the existence of a number of pleonastic, rambling and downright boring pieces that would never see the light of day in the mainstream media. And the blogging medium certainly is a magnet for people with a penchant for airing views regardless of their significance to the world-at-large.
On the other hand, there are many food blogs written by thoughtful and talented people who simply love food and who love writing about it, with a number being of high quality. The lack of editorial oversight or a need to kowtow to corporate interests permits the expression of views that might be deemed radical in the mainstream; or, if not exactly radical, views that deviate from the standardised opinions regularly published in newspapers, magazines and the like.
Ed Charles writes in the mainstream press for a living for a number of publications, spreading his focus evenly between food and wine, and business and finance. He is also a prolific blogger, and is recognised as one of Australian blogging's strongest - and most articulate - advocates.
"One of the chief attractions of food blogging is that it frees you from the conventions and restrictions of the mainstream," he points out.
Restaurant reviewing is one format perfectly suited to bloggers. The conventions of mainstream reviews are that a published review will take into account the experience of the reviewer in the restaurant, but at the same time will broaden that experience so it applies - theoretically - to that of every person walking through the restaurant's front door. It's a tried and tested technique, it's safe, and it's what the people buying the papers, the mags and the guides expect.
The trouble with those sorts of conventions is that they iron out any individual ups and downs experienced by the diner," says Charles. "Blogging, on the other hand, is open and honest about being the description of a personal experience, whether good or bad. The priority for most bloggers is sharing that individual experience."
Blogging, in other words, is not about trying to please everyone. It's about putting some thoughts out into cyberspace to see who responds. Seen in one light it's "citizen journalism" in its purest form, with inbuilt technology allowing for people to make comment, to add their two cents' worth, to turn the review/article/diatribe into a conversation between people from all demographics, ages and tastes.
Seen from another perspective, though, this "debate" can be seen as an indulgent free for all. The medium itself has no way to filter the pedestrian from the sparkling; this task is left solely to the reader. The challenge for readers (and chefs and editors) is that blogging tests the limits of an often predictable format, transforming the simple act of dining into an organic, multi-faceted debate.
© David Sutherland
A short list of blogs (not all dining blogs) worth a look:
http://feedmedrinkme.blogspot.com/ (USA)
http://thebreakfastblog.blogspot.com/ (Australia)
http://www.ethicurean.com/ (USA)
http://www.tomatom.com/ (Australia)
http://www.lastappetite.com/ (Australia)
http://www.chezpim.com/ (USA)
http://countingsheep.typepad.com/amuse_bouche/ (USA)
|
