Food awards need a review too
By Anoothi Vishal
Restaurant awards are getting competitive, with a new one arriving almost every month unsolicited on our feeds. At this rate we may just need an award for the best awards!
But let’s not be flippant. Some awards do have a big impact on the business of restaurants. Restaurateurs have told me that their businesses go up with at least international recognition. With more Indians travelling and eating out, the need for discovery is real. Awards and lists that can facilitate this may not be empty vanity industry fests.
With the combined social media marketing of so many restaurants, sponsors, the media in charge and influencers in their orbits, lists, stars and crowns are reaching many more aspiring diners in India, where affluence and ambition towards acquiring social and cultural capital is still growing in pockets of smaller towns and in areas of bigger metros that were oblivious to luxury dining till three-four years ago.
India is an important market for eating out today, and does deserve a gold standard in awards. I don’t buy the argument that all awards are subjective—choices are, but best practices and how to constantly course correct to have a system that works fairly is a process that is worth trying to perfect.
A few awards and industry gatherings are better known and more esteemed than a whole lot of others in this business. How useful are they to diners?
I did a quick poll yesterday of people who have nothing to do with the restaurant industry, except as foodies who pay good money to visit upscale restaurants. And I got different versions of the same answer. “There’s nothing new”, “lacklustre”, “usual suspects” and so on.
In short, the element of discovery is missing in most domestic awards.
Many international awards and lists work in India because affluent Indian travellers are now spending considerable money on food and travel internationally and looking for reccos of places they may not know about, which come with prestige and an assurance of a good or unique experience given how expensive these things are, and how much the rupee is to the dollar.
Within India, with the pervasiveness of all kinds of influencers, PR and reel-makers, people have in fact already made this discovery of Delhi, Mumbai, Goa, Bangalore restaurants much before an annual award show. They don’t require any one to cement the nod. We are in an age where everyone is a food expert and barring just about 3-4 people, that credibility + reach is owned by no one.
Indian foodies now want to be the first in their circles to have checked out a new restaurant trending on their whatsapp groups. And I have often observed that much before the assorted food media starts talking about a restaurant, word of mouth has already built around the place, and fashionable foodies are on to it. For instance, the latest buzz in south Delhi just now is a modern Thai restaurant which hasn’t quite been discovered by the media at large.
By the time, it makes it to a list and if it does, it won’t be “discovery”, in fact, it may be gasping. But a sound and experienced reviewer does develop a sense of worthy restaurants right when they appear on the firmament. Something unique, executed well, needs a discovery and a place on lists much faster so having a system that is up-to-date is more important than ever, as even Michelin in Dubai is discovering, having put restaurants that have already shut on their list!
How foodies dine is changing, and how discoveries can be on point must change too. If an award is not meant to facilitae discovery but recognise consistency, longetivity of business and excellence, then, it most certainly needs different guardrails and even more stringent parameters—anonymous, independent diners chosen with utmost care is just one of them, and clearly defined benchmarks such as evolution may be another.
Every critic, who is a subject matter expert and different from a “foodie” or enthusiast, has a different way of looking at experience It stems from your values, your politics and way of dealing with the world. My belief, for instance, has been that for any critique to be worthwhile, it must not only judge skill (which should be a given at the top level), but be able to stake one’s reputation on standing up for places and people that are often overlooked, forgotten, or not spoken about in a new light rather than anointing the already-anointed.
This can only happen when editorially, you have your ear to the ground. Second-hand opinion via what’s already trending means little. But this is how now many “reviewers” operate unfortunately.
On the other hand, the most credible media, and awards internationally, have built credibility via enabling discovery and championing the unknown — being the first to talk of people, establishments and places that are unfamiliar, new or who no one betted on before.
When an Indian restaurant gets lauded by the NYT, it is, for its non-brown audience, an invitation to go explore with an open mind because a critic who has studied cuisines across cultures and has experienced all sorts of restaurants stakes their reputation on saying this is the best in the city.
Because people trust some channels and brands more for a consistency of point of view and rigour, they are inclined to spend serious money on expensive restaurants globally basis that recco. Some of the most prominent international awards and lists that now have a growing following among well-to-do Indians work because people still value expert endorsement.
Indian awards and lists that want similar cred, must not just ensure trust in their processes, but also their relevance to people outside the industry, and an echo chamber of chefs, restaurateurs and the 150 erudite foodies within the ecosystems of Mumbai, Goa and Bangalore.
High spending domestic tourism has been growing in India and people are always asking me, for instance, for reccos for, say, Lucknow, Ludhiana, Pune, Jaipur, Udaipur, Hyderabad and more. A lone T3 in Hyderabad, already the top restaurant of choice for anyone visiting the city for about a year, including many industrialists spotted within it (and at the table of its OG sister The Spicy Venue, that is not on any lists), is not enough DEI. Neither is any village drowning in influencer marketing.
Who is the award meant for, primarily? is thus a good place to begin with. Is it for the industry to see itself in the mirror, or for diners who want to travel and eat, or for brand managers who want to allie with restaurants because food is the new fashion? You can say all, but usually, who gets awarded shows the lens through which the awarder views things.
The other thing that I would judge any award by is its rigour. With so many arbitrators of taste today, trust in their judgement is perhaps the most precious commodity.
There are a few people whose judgement I do trust; when chefs recommend something, I pay attention—and then check it out to make up my mind. But I do not trust the opinion of those who do not often travel and are acquainted with just a handful of restaurants in their neighbourhoods and who do not spend money eating out. They may be the best cooks, know what skilfully cooked food is but unless, they are also adventurous and spend time and effort eating out in different cities (and countries) with open mindedness, they should not be comparing apples to oranges.
So, which award is the fairest of them all? Should you follow a single critic’s judgement, or crowd-sourced opinion?
I’d judge awards, basis a few of these things:
- Has the jury really eaten at restaurants they are judging? Is there proof? Sedentary socialites keeping a good table at home, the city gourmand who never visits other cities are not equipped to critique. It is a specialist’s job requiring study. Awards based on social media reputations are sus.
- Do the awards have a point of view? Opinion is subjective, but the criterion must be clear. Upscale, and pleasant has no meaning. Is the guideline creativity, individuality, consistency, diversity, actual commercial success? The eaters want to know.
- Who is funding the show? Awards that take money from restaurants to enroll are obviously not to be taken seriously at all. But also, who is the sponsor or sponsors? Businesses with serious tuck with restaurants being judged is an obvious red flag.
Ps. Excessive social media campaigns in the aftermath, is another. If attention is a commodity sold, who is buying it?
