Always a pleasure to read your stuff, but this one is setting a new and even higher bar. Cheers!

The “link” between food and wine actually isn’t all that relevant to the question of ethics in each field of criticism. The reason some restaurant critics practice anonymity, etc. is due to the fear that their experience will be different than the readers’ if they’re known while they dine. That can’t happen with bottled wine, though there’s a danger while barrel-tasting.

http://www.afjonline.com/afj.aspx?pgID=874

Personally, I have no problem with wine writers’ ethics, it is just an interesting observation. With food and wine being so closely linked I would think their criticism would be too.

It’s also worth noting that almost no other critics work this way. Music, film, theater, literary, art, etc. critics are neither anonymous, nor expected to pay for what they’re reviewing, nor expected to avoid the people who produce what they’re reviewing. Yes, a few — very few — publications have their own rules that trump the usual practices, but they’re a rarity. So a better question might be: is restaurant criticism measurably superior to all other forms of criticism? If it’s not, then one probably can’t credit the rules imposed on it.

Arthur makes an excellent point about extremely high-end restaurants and the cost to review them. It’s worth asking whether, for example, Per Se can be skillfully reviewed on a tight budget, which is almost all there is these days. I mean, obviously it *can*, but a three-visit review that takes in the full experience is far, far more useful to the reader than a one-visit review based on dining from the new bar menu.

And in general, I think this shows the way to think about critics. Are they serving you or not? If they are, then doesn’t that matter an awful lot more than how they work? If they’re not, then we can consider why that is, and conflicts of interest may indeed be the reason. But it serves no one if a critic practices the most painstaking ethical separation yet cannot produce work that’s useful to anyone.

The problem is that most restaurant and food critics operate within such a radius of their home that would allow them to drive to the establishment. Many if not most wine critics live hundreds if not thousands from the subject of their critiquing.

However, if we consider the meal and the related service the subject product and the critic has such renown, and their opinion can set the establishment in a broader culinary landscape thus generating greater revenue, the only way to get the critic to experience the food and service is to get them to your establishment.

For a place like the French Laundry, where a Prix Fixe for one is a bit less than a round trip flight between JFK and SFO, this may make sense.

Would it be acceptable for a restaurant to pay for a critic’s travel, prepare a free meal, and provide lodging? I don’t believe any food critics work this way .(however I’m just guessing)