Thanks for this perspective. I actually ran into this issue for the first time this past weekend. I was invited for a comped dinner at a place that is a little outside of my usual price point. I stated in my post (http://bit.ly/8szP4m) that the meal was comped, and I still reported on areas that could have been better. Thankfully, the meal was overall pretty dang good so I didn't have to write a negative review, but I'd be interested in hearing how others have handled that in the past.Thanks,Kevin

I call B.S. Do like a regular customer and pay for the meal(s) before reviewing. Can't afford to do that? Find another job you can afford to have. Integrity is more important than anything, but you may not grasp that concept in your quest to be a critic.

I think that's an important difference between food bloggers and people whose profession is to review food. For the profession, hopefully there is a salary to support the work and there absolutely must be a code of ethics and disclosure.For food bloggers, however, I think it is a choice. I have chosen to disclose whether or not I have any sich relationship and I have a statement about that at my blog. Also, I look for such a statement on other blogs I read and use that as one of the criteria by which I decide whether to read a blog. I think the more authoritative the blog, the more pressure it should have to adopt an ethical stance. But it's optional. Also, since writing about food isn't my profession, then I am under no obligation to eat by any particular schedule or price range. I can have a food blog about living within my means, and that can have an appeal of its own. So I think the argument that any food blogger must have comps or discounts in order to sustain a blog is not a valid one.Never having worked as a professional food critic, however, I have no data from which to comment on the difficulties of maintaining a code of ethical reporting.

Brad, Integrity and accepting a comp are not mutually exclusive. Most of the meals I've written about I've paid for just like anyone else. I used the exact same criteria to write about the one I didn't.Kevin

First of all, I think all restaurants should have a 'do not negotiate with terrorists' policy--especially with bloggers.When I go out to eat on the weekend, I go where I want to go with the intention of dropping a ton of money because I'm starving. If I get comped--great. If not, I'll live. If I'm really happy, I'll even write about it. But I never go with the intent of writing a review, as I carry 'the golden rule' policy when writing--which leads me to my next point:One time I did get into a dispute over my not writing up some [free] food. I hated the stuff. I wrote what I thought and was asked to take it down. I did.Great topic btw.

If you choose to write a blog, you should choose to pay for your meal. Better yet, write credible interesting content, and the readership and revenue might allow you to pay for your meals out of profits. I'll be the first to admit that credible good content doesn't always lead to profits (as I shut down a blog that I think met that criteria, but never made any real money), but if it doesn't, I'd rather shut down my blog or find another way to tell stories than to take free meals. Food writing is hobby for most and a paid privilege for some, but it is not an excuse to get free meals.

Hey, all. Thanks for all the comments. Oddly, I am out for the night for ... seriously and I didn't plan this ... a media dinner. I wish I could plan that well but the fact of the matter is, it just happened this way. So, will post some responses to all these great comments tomorrow.

Really? This seems like a cheap spoiled white kids (who grew older, but not up, crying that the rentals cut them off) whine about not getting a free meal. Bloggers and Yelpers a like, you are not professionals, hence why you're freelancing. My strong opinion has always been the difference between a professional and an armature is getting paid. Once you are good enough to do something with monetary value, you will and should get paid for it. Getting a free meal, is in fact a payment. It may not be, in fact a bribe of sorts, because many restaurants, before they open will have a party/opening event with anything from passed samples to full meals, but things like that are for a select few members throughout the cities/neighborhoods. Those select few are invited because they are in fact, professionals; a person with something of value to give themselves.A comp is pretty much a restaurant puckering up and kissing ass. You can't satisfy everyone, and the high majority of bloggers are those who you really can't satisfy. A professional writer/food critic has the ability and training to write out a review of a restaurant without bias and with nothing more than information needed for a reader to make his/her own judgement. A blogger often times fit into that 'unsatisfiable few', their opinions are heavily judgmental, heavily biased and more likely than not, you will see a review followed by an unsatisfactory visit. Its why bloggers blog instead of actually get paid for their opinions.Price for a meal is an important factor in a full and detailed review of a restaurant. Restaurants do not want 'cheap' customers, nor do they want more cheap customers gathering, adding to an image of 'cheap' customer restaurant. The last thing a fine dining restaurant wants is to be compared to IHOP or Denny's as that would be the crowd called upon by a review of a writer looking for a comped meal. More than likely, the wait staff probably don't want you either, as with the fact being, as soon as you try to get a comped meal, for whatever reason, they know that their tip is going to be minimal at best. It's another reason why most professional food critics get expense accounts/comped from the publisher, not the restaurant, so the writer can get a full, unbiased review, not affected by service. If you want to be paid to review high end restaurants, write something good enough to get paid for, then you won't have to worry about it. Until then, stick with what you can afford and hope to one day get a break. Restaurants need to make money too, but in order to do that, they need to get paid for the product they produce, if it's good enough to pay for, they'll stay in business. That's the way this industry works. If you want to become a fully paid professional, then you should be willing to dish out what it takes until you can become one, don't complain about being like everyone else and having to pay for your meal.

Thanks for all the comments. I'll say it ... FINALLY! People need to comment on blogs more, including me. From the bottom up:Kevin. Glad we could help. More important, I would L.O.V.E. if the conversation could switch from "you're wrong if you take a comp" to "how to freaking handle it." Like lobbyists, it is a reality, so getting it out in the open and getting some realistic guidelines is gonna resolve the issues more than pretending it doesn't happen.Brad:We aren't talking about critics, we are talking about writers.Mike:Thanks for that top on the dispute. I'll likely write up a post on that kind of crap soon. I wish you would put it back up, in fact. Nagrant:I could open up a hornet's nest here, but I don't think that this is the forum. We should have a cage match on Facebook or somewhere maybe slightly more neutral. Chuck:I got to the point in your post, line three, and decided not to go on because, wait, bloggers are not professionals? and I think you were implying that freelancers aren't professional? Wow. You must be fancy.

Honestly if I know a writer is comped meals so that he or she can review places, his or her reviews no longer have any real value to me. Part of the reason is that if you aren't successful enough in general to pay for your own meals at fine dining places, your perceptions of the place in its social context will not be comparable to the typical paying customer there. Is that elitist and snobby? Perhaps, but the fact is that who the customers are impacts their perception of the food, the context of the food, the service and context fo the service and just about everything else. Someone who can't afford such things on their own (and an expense account at a newspaper counts as compensation, and hence as "their own" even if it's not tacked onto the critic's salary) will not perceive the food or service in the same way as those who can dine there as normal customers.Most of the best restaurant critics of the past 200 years supported themselves and paid for their own food because they were so good that readers would pay for their opinions, and not just for opinions about this place or that place, but for ideas about where else to dine.The fact of the matter is that blogging has swamped the market of professional reviewers, dilluting the value of reviews both for the reviewer and for the customer. How on earth can I know who to trust when every Tom, Dick and Harry writes reviews of places? The problem would only get worse if restaurants started handing out free meals. Don't flatter yourself and encourage other bloggers into thinking that your restaurant reviews are sooooo important that restuarants should hand out free meals to get them. It's absurd. And tacky.Point blank: If you can't afford to buy your own meals either through your own wealth or, better yet, through the selling of your food writing, admit to yourself that your business model has failed and that your review writing is merely a hobby. If you still want to make a business of it, focus on a niche food area that you CAN afford. No shame is specializing in hot dog stands or buffets or hole-in-the-wall ethnic places - plenty of people still eat at those places and will seek out the best ones. Or focus on free or cheap promo events - tell people where and when they are and then afterwards tell them what they missed if they didn't go.

"Most of the best restaurant critics of the past 200 years supported themselves and paid for their own food"I very much doubt that this is true. I think in general, almost everything about impartiality in ethics in journalism is a relatively recent invention, and most of the name writers of the past never touched a check and tended to drop unsubtle hints about sending a case of that one over to my office tomorrow and so on.Beyond that, I have a real problem with Eric M's assertion that I need to be making enough money to eat at Alinea a few times before I ever write one word in public. Suffice it to say, it seems awfully out of step with the times, which encourage everyone to be a writer, regardless of station, not to mention it abdicates your own role in choosing whose opinions to follow-- one reason that I love the present age of diversity in opinions is that, well, I don't exactly agree with the HR departments of major newspapers as to whose opinion I should follow, or why. Beyond THAT, as I've said before to Nagrant and others, all this is predicated on the idea that the review is the primary unit of food writing. But why should I model my blogging on the antiquated notions of the newspaper? Why should those who regularly rag on Pat Bruno nonetheless concede that his form is the only one that matters? I write about food from a dozen different perspectives, and reviewing is a small part of that, and to my mind a minor one as well. If you were compiling Best American Food Writing next year, how much of it would be reviews as opposed to all the other ways of getting at the subject?The Review Written In the Official Voice of the August Monopoly Daily is a dying form whose horizons were never that high to begin with (basically, a buying guide). I think there are plenty of reasons to be wary of comps, co-optation, whatever, but the priorities of The Review are low on that list to me. The real currency has always been access, flattery, the desire to be part of the in crowd with the right opinions, etc., and if I fall for those then the possibility that I got a free steak is, so to speak, small potatoes. Focusing on ethical minutiae over food is a way to avoid having to deal with all the other ways in which a writer may already be biased, or blinkered, or writing what his audience wants to hear rather than what he really thinks.

make that "impartiality and ethics"

I stick with what I said. Opinions are like ass holes, everyone has one, and most of the time, when said hole excretes certain matters, the only one who ends up feeling good about it in the end is the actual owner of the ass hole. Many others see the result and think it is shit. Hence my original point. A blogger usually always is creating and forming their own product and item. A professional (defined under my original posting as a person actually getting paid by another to do a certain task)actually has someone else come up to him/her seeking that person's professional advice.People always seem impressed with independent film makers/artist/musicians and such, but until they catch a break, they're just bums. Truth be told, the majority rarely do catch a break. Until then, they are bums. If i draw a picture on a piece of paper, should I get paid and praise for it? No. Unless it's good and a number of people recognize it as something with value. Then and only then am I no longer a bum. If someone has access and ability to write something out and post it, does that make you a professional? I doubt that as well.Every person who auditions for shows like American Idol thinks they have the ability to do something special. Should they all get contracts and taken on tour? I don't think so, and many others would agree. So why should freelance writers and bloggers be treated any differently, just because they have access to a media which can relay a message to a larger audience group?The root word in freelance is 'free'. It applies double meaning in the word free in both that you are not attached to anything but also that your income is limited or non-existent. In defense of my original argument, still not a professional. If you want that comp and that paycheck for being a professional writer, you need to work for it and compete for it. That means producing a product that can sell, and in your case, written material. Your defense against these postings seems like an escape for the fact of you know what you need to do, but are not willing to actually do it. If you want to become a professional food critic, strive for it, work for it. Until then, you're just an amateur blogger expressing you opinion.

Jeez, Chuck, where do you live, 1958?

I resent this continued assertion that freelancers and bloggers are "not professionals." Everyone knows that there are only a handful of positions available -- most of which don't pay anything. Time and again, everyone bitches that they are barely making it, but convincing everyone that it's worth being suckered at the end of the day in the name of journalism. If you think Bruno and Vettel's positions are going to be lasting much longer than their tenure, it's time to wake up. All of the other markets have begun to embrace bloggers, including publications that realize the game has changed. Chicago seems to be stuck this pissing contest mentality of who "keeps it real" enough by discrediting others.Are you that much more honest throwing down an ungodly amount of money you have no budget for in order to write a review that caters to 2% of the population when you're immediately recognized, even as an "anonymous" reviewer? And is this information included in every review? How you, as the "average person," cannot afford the restaurant you are eating at? Granted, anyone can make a blog -- but not everyone can make a GOOD blog. Instead of viewing bloggers as the source of evil, you should view it as an opportunity for harnessing entrepreneurial spirit. I think it's a shame that Mike Nagrant abandoned Hungry Magazine. It was a beautiful layout, had wonderful articles and so much potential to make money on its own. Instead of lending your talents to a publication (or publications) that takes most of the cut, you could easily put that same effort into having YOUR publication. The funniest part of all of these discussions is that none of these things matter to the average person. People just want you to tell them where to get a good sandwich, and chances are, they might not even agree with your "professional opinion." No one follows one reviewer strictly and there's a strong likelihood they're checking five other sources at the same time. So whether or not someone takes a comp, it's all surveyed information. And if it's not a review, who cares?! Book editors don't get criticized for requesting books from publicists. Thousands of free cds go unlistened to by music journalists, while a preferred columnist gets to pick a hot album to review. And fashion writers get thrown free clothes constantly. So why does it matter if someone gets comped a free dish?

On a final note, I'd just like to note that I have a journalism degree. One of the reasons I started my own blog was because I was sick of being offered attribution, experience or less than $5-25 as a source of payment. That doesn't make me unprofessional.