Menupages censoring negative reviews of sponsors?
Was just wondering if anyone else has noticed this? I posted a pretty negative review of a burger joint called Twisted Burger on 14th St. a couple of weeks ago. I gave it 2 out of 5 and wrote up my experience with their food. I only went there once but have heard other people who have had similar experiences with the place.
Anyway, I didn't think much of it when my review didn't post, thinking perhaps they have moderators review the postings for obscenitiy, invective or lack of relevance. After a week it still hadn't posted, I also noticed when I checked back on the site that Twisted Burger seems to be a menupages sponsor - their listings appear with little promotional by-lines in the site's directory and search results. I emailed their contact address for feedback to ask what their policy on sponsor reviews was and so far haven't heard back.
Just wondering if anyone else has had similar experiences? I resubmitted the review today to see if it was a technical glitch. If they censor reviews I have to say the site will have lost what little credibility it still had for me.
PS - Am also wondering if anyone else agrees with me about Twisted Burger? It was about the worst hamburger I've had in New York, and that's saying something.
I just checked on the 'Manhattan' board I couldn't find it. I know I've been censored for some odd stuff from time to time. Nothing rude or obsiene just opinions or questions that they didn't like for what ever reason. That's fine they have a philosophy that they are trying to adhere to. But censoring views on sponsors is another issue altogether...lets see how long this stays up.
I think this type of thing is very common place on forums of all types that have advertisers paying the bills and this wouldn't surprise me at all. I used to visit a travel forum that started deleting posts related to crime on the island. Bottom line is it's not good for their advertisers. I do believe it ultimately backfires as people aren't stupid and catch on quickly. All it does is give a forum a bad reputation. Most of the people who posted on the travel forum I mentioned got tired of being censored and have left. That's not good for advertisers either.
You are right about people catching on. It is one of the many things that ruined Citysearch. When it started as sidewalk.com it was a great site.
It removes credibility from a site. I'm not sure if Yelp deletes bad reviews of sponsors, but it does sort the favorable reviews to the top for advertisers. When you have a few lousy meals after that, the site is not one that gets relied on and only used when there's no other info elsewhere ... and even then you take it with a grain of salt.
There are so many restaurants and sources of advertising that to do this seems pointless. Let the few bad restaurants advertise elsewhere if they don't like the negative reviews. Why compromise a site for the few bad apples.
That being said, I never read the reviews on menupages because to me the only point of that site is for menus that are no where else. I wish the Chow place record had a section for a menu for those places that don't have websites.
CitySearch doesn't have meticulous moderators like Chowhound, and thus is completely useless: the playground of shills, nutjob diners, disgruntled ex-employees, and unscrupulous competitors.
There's a Harvard Square restaurateur who very transparently posts negatively against his nearby competitors: he's so stupid he uses the exact same style for all his posts despite using different bogus identities. Many restaurant sites (and hundreds of other types of user-review-based sites) are similarly useless for the same reason.
Chowhound is one of the rare places where you can build up some trust in certain reviewers. I completely ignore the voice of the undifferentiated mob (as in Zagat's reviews) and the anonymous individual poster (as on CitySearch, MenuPages, TripAdvisor, and so on.)
I must say that I am not surprised. I got suspicious of menupages a while back when I first noticed that if there was a negative review, within the next day or two, there would be three or four or five positive ones posted right away, sometimes even directly invoking the negative review. I just assumed it was an owner/worker or some such person checking to be sure that menupages showed good reviews for their own restaurant (even more striking when several of the "positive reviews" would sound remarkably similar).
Quite frankly, I guess I'm surprised anyone still takes menupages reviews seriously. As rworange said, I use it mainly just for the menus posted online. Or for the links to that restaurant's own website (along with address/telephone info).
The original comment has been removed