On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Indrajit Gupta <[email protected]> wrote:
> Commenting on the quality of the review is meaningless; I am so biased that
> it would be laughable. The Hindu never ever interfered. My wife, too, used
> to do pieces for the same Supplement (not when my daughter was working with
> them; the two women were squeaky clean in avoiding such situations). She,
> who also took me in tow on some occasions, has had the same freedom. I
> don't know if it is radically different in Chennai; I doubt it; but at
> Bangalore, most certainly what you describe was never present. Never ever.
> And The Hindu correspondent was conspicuously the one who never picked up
> the PR goodies. House policy, not to be trifled with.
I am curious now. Do you happen to have links to (or scans of) a
couple of these reviews? Did the reviews that were published have
*anything* not positive to say about the restaurants? Say, the napkins
were a tad soiled? Or the waiters were gossipy? Or the menu had funny
typos? Or that some of the dishes were lukewarm when they arrived at
your table? Was the chicken ever dry? The soup too salty?
I don't mean to cast aspersions on the journalistic integrity of the
Das Gupta women. Perhaps I have just had the misfortune of reading one
too many completely-positive gushing reviews.
Thaths
--
"Lisa, Vampires are make-believe, like elves, gremlins, and Eskimos."
-- Homer J. Simpson
Sudhakar Chandra Slacker Without Borders
