Tuesday night was
Pittsburgh Restaurant Week's bi-annual Blogger Dinner, this time featured at
Sausalido in Bloomfield {thanks for the delish wine, Pittsburgh Winery!}. An interesting topic was brought up among the blogger folk:
When you have a somewhat bad to really terrible dining experience, do you go ahead and blog about it?
A few fellow bloggers were on the fence, but several said they would not blog about it period, quoting everyone's proverbial mom, "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it!" I do remember my own mom telling me this, then proceeding to ignore it and say what I please. The claim Tuesday night was that you wouldn't want the negative comments coming back and reflecting negatively on you, as a professional, parent or community member. Perhaps because I do not hail from PGH, this isn't a solid issue for me, but I completely understand this for others.
As someone who frequently writes food reviews, I believe in letting them know if they've done something...
unsavory, let's say, so they may try to fix it. I'm not a prestigious Pittsburgh food blogger with hundreds of readers, but I'd hope someone would read the review and take something useful from it. In a weird way, choosing to not post a review seems a tinge dishonest.
Readers, what do you think? Would you rather read the good, bad and ugly of a restaurant experience, or just read positive reviews? Is relying on word-of-mouth sufficient for hearing about bad restaurants?
Restaurant folks, what are your thoughts on bloggers writing a negative review?