About Where's Good to Eat?
Customer Power - Making Informed Decisions about Eating Out
‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ grew out of frustration in trying to answer what, at first sight, seemed to be a relatively straightforward question. The result is a unique system that recognises the subjectivity inherent in deciding where to eat out and yet manages to be an effective coordinator of public opinion.
New Users of ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ Should Read - “Getting the Best Out of ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’”
Guiding Principles
‘Where’s Good to Eat’ is guided by five key principles:
-
Authenticity – all input is published without modification or constraint unless it is abusive or bogus and, whilst we cannot vouch for the honesty of contributors, we provide the means to check their credibility;
-
Local Focus – eating out is primarily a local activity and the sharing of knowledge by regular diners is the key to finding out ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’;
-
Completeness – all eating places are listed because you can’t judge if somewhere is good or not unless you know what you are comparing it with;
-
Easy Access – the site is open and accessible, only requiring a verified email address in order to input a recommendation, with no accounts or passwords;
-
Editorial Control – comments and nicknames are moderated (checked) by an editor to prevent inappropriate use, on a real-time basis.
The Problem
When we originally thought about ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ we looked at web sites providing information about eating out and decided that none of them answered the question framed in the title, for the simple reason that they didn’t start out with that objective in mind. One group were mainly advertising media, with content clearly intended to attract advertisers rather than inform the public, whilst the other group tended to focus on distinct internet users (e.g. tourists, business travellers, IT Users, etc.) at a national or international level. We knew from working with restaurateurs and caterers that 80 – 90% of their custom came from local people so it was obvious to us that such sites could only ever provide anecdotal advice.
Some sites carried comments, votes or scores but there was always, of course, the problem of how to prevent abuse and ensure they were actually useful to the audience. For most, however, it was clear from the complete lack of criticism on them that they were simply using comments or votes to promote current or potential advertisers. Where input was unbiased, the controls often resulted in onerous registration processes and therefore, limited content. The alternative, open forums of the type used for subject area advice or “chat-rooms”, generally resulted in an unhelpful “free-for-all” with no methodical conclusion.
Trust Is the Key
We felt that effective information sharing by customers would allow them to answer the question ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ for themselves by choosing whether to recommend somewhere, or not. All that was required was an accessible database on the web and a simple system to manage input and display. The difficulty lay, we thought, in how to reassure people that they were looking at genuine recommendations from members of the public and not advertising copy whilst, at the same time, ensuring appropriate editorial controls. In practice, the public quickly realised the potential of the site and, with minimal policing from us, started to build a hierarchy based on the volume of recommendations input.
Crucial to that early success was the ability to look at previous input from individuals, via their nickname link, to assess their way of thinking and put their comment into context. This facility was later extended through the use of Selected Reviewers, contributors selected by the Editor for their objectivity across a range of establishments, being highlighted in bold type. There are, of course, individuals who try to use ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ for their own ends by entering recommendations for their own, or friends’ establishments or criticism of competitors. Although objectionable, these recommendations have little impact on the overall effectiveness of the site because the volume of data and consistent use of nicknames means users can easily spot these entries and ignore them.
What About Money?
‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ operates as a business and carries advertising to finance it. Advertisers must, however, accept that the sites’ impartiality cannot be compromised and, with notably few exceptions, they have always done so. A brief look at unfavourable comments on the site shows clearly that advertisers receive no favourable editorial bias but do, we believe, benefit hugely from association with a new, more open approach to customer comments.Has The Question Been Answered?
The proof of the pudding is, as they say, in the eating and enthusiasm for ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ has been tremendous. The initial site for the
The level of usage means we can confidently say that the question ‘Where’s Good to Eat?’ is being answered for
