Fritto misto isn’t that bad and they have big portions.
“isn’t that bad” is not how a restaurant lands on an “Essential” list. Still shaking my head over this bizarre list.
They certainly won’t complain about the food and it’s been YEARS since I’ve been, but the hard chairs, deafening acoustics (when full), and lack of a comfortable waiting area could be all be issues…
felt compelled to mention that on their most recent iteration, there are 18 essential chinese restaurants in the LA area and EIGHT of them are west of the 710.
conclusion: the word essential is clearly equivocal when used as an eater ‘list’ headline adjective.
7 Likes
someone there read my post; a new headline now announces a revised list of “vibrant” vietnamese restaurants. hmm.
i am SO resisting the urge to say more.
3 Likes
Verily, visually very vibrant Vietnamese… #TheAlliterationWillGetWorse
1 Like
Warrior: I appreciate the Eater lists. They introduce a wide variety of restaurants I wouldn’t otherwise have known about. I also think their lists have good diversity. For example, I was happy to see that they included the homey vegetarian restaurant Thien Tam in their list of 20 Vietnamese restaurants. It’s nice place to have a light lunch.
3 Likes
ok. what about the 18 chinese restaurants with EIGHT west of the 710 when the SGV is home to the great selection/diversification of regional chinese cuisine outside of china?
let me guess: you live within a 10 mile radius of the intersection of the 405 & the 10. that seems to be the target demographic of the eater lists.
2 Likes
You don’t think the reason Eater doesn’t use the word best is because if they did it would exclude most of LA? Is it that awful that they are trying to have a geographically diverse list? Most of the non SGV restaurants are discussed often enough on this board.
6 Likes
Warrior: one irony here is that I ate at Xiang La Hui today because I saw it in an Eater list. To the extent that your point is that the best Chinese restaurants are in the SGV, I agree with that except for Kato and Pearl River Deli.
1 Like
Hey everyone, just to add some additional clarity to this. I get intel from my personal experience, from forums, from IG, from emails, from friends, from lots and lots of sources, as I think any astute food person does. I’d like to think a lot of people in the forums also gain intel about where to eat from Eater, without credit to us in particular every time, but that’s totally fine. We’re here to serve the reader as much as possible, whether it’s openings/closings/interviews/profiles/guides and more.
Lists like our maps/guides are a part of the service component of Eater and also plenty of other sites like Time Out, LA Times, and Infatuation. They should be seen as guides, as ever-changing compilations of restaurants we like. We are tasked to change them regularly, which means good places have to come off, and sometimes less than celebrated places come on for one reason or another. Ultimately, we as an editorial team decide what we think is worthy of inclusion, so those choices do rest on us. But realize that lists and their related content are a huge part of what people value in Eater, and what honestly pays the bills/keeps the lights on/pays livable salaries here. So take that for what it’s worth. Food media isn’t like tech or broadcast media. As one recent article about the valuation of Buzzfeed showed in the NY Times, Vox/Vice/Buzzfeed get the crumbs of what Facebook/Google/Amazon make when it comes to content.
To answer your thing about Chinese restaurants…well, I do agree with you. We have an SGV guide (that needs updating…and we’ll get to that) that obviously compiles great restaurants in that area. We’ve been asked to do a Chinese food map across Los Angeles. Obviously, people have debated what “LA” means ad nauseum, but we try our best to be as inclusive as possible.
21 Likes
Warrior: I will note that the Google search results for the Eater lists appear to have been designed to say “best restaurants” instead of “essential restaurants.” Moreover, even “essential restaurants” is preceded by “The.” So while I appreciate that Eater changes the lists regularly and conspicuously strives for diversity, which is a good thing for people like me who already know about the well-known restaurants, I do think the lists are misleading. Unless, for example, the intent is truly to tell readers that Sunday Gravy is better or more essential to LA than Osteria Mozza.
1 Like
I don’t understand why EaterLA staff post defensively seemingly whenever EaterLA is criticized for the quality/content of their latest click-bait listicles, especially when those defensive replies essentially consist of, “FTC isn’t the sole target audience, so we aren’t only going to list ‘the very best of the best’ and have X, Y and Z other considerations to account for, too.” Even if the listicle in question has “The best…” in the title.
Um, okay? And? Seems pretty thin-skinned and silly, especially if the main argument is that FTC isn’t the sole target audience (which is true, clearly); so why is EaterLA staff seemingly (overly) sensitive to criticism from posters on a website that isn’t the primary and sole target audience? Shouldn’t this be rather self-evident and agreed-upon/accepted by all? I don’t get it. Are we “not supposed” to criticize another websites restaurant listicles peppered with undeserved hyperbolic superlatives?
My strong suggestion to EaterLA staff is to try and refrain from taking threads on FTC so personally and to please keep in mind that FTC was started by a group of Chowhound refugees; as such, it may be important for EaterLA staff to refresh themselves on the “Chowhound Manifesto” before responding so defensively, since that ethos was the drive behind the founding members of FTC (emphasis added):
1 Like
I didn’t read @matthewkang’s reply from yesterday as defensive or thin-skinned at all. I thought it was professional, reasonable, and definitely relevant to the discussion in this thread. I don’t understand how one could read that reply as “taking threads on FTC so personally” unless the starting point is any reply at all is “taking it so personally.” It almost feels like you and I read completely different posts because I cannot imagine reading @matthewkang’s reply and having the reaction you had. I, for one, appreciate Eater’s presence here and have appreciated Eater’s contributions/responses.
17 Likes
I definitely was not trying to be defensive, just explain some of the mechanics behind words like “essential or best” as relates to things like search engine optimization and engagement. When we use “best TK restaurants” in our search headline (which often differs from what site headline or search headline), it’s in order to gain position on Google, and get people to use them. And I think most sensible online publishers are trying to do the same.
As for criticism, this certainly isn’t the only place we get it! We get criticism from restaurateurs, chefs, industry members (often directly and to our phones at all hours of the day/night), our own staff, Twitter, IG, email, hell even carrier pigeons if that was an option. We’re used to it, and trust me when I say we have pretty thick skin. There’s nothing like getting hurled insults on my physical appearance or whatever via dozens if not hundreds of Youtube comments because of an opinion I have about food.
I’m just trying to answer the question of why our lists are the way they are and spill a little of tea on the mechanics of list-oriented content.
19 Likes
But how much do you miss Adrian Gonzales? Did you guys go ahead and finally hire him to fact-check your geography? 
7 Likes
Santa Monica is it’s own CITY!!!
5 Likes
lol you guys
5 Likes
What was up with the Adrian’s in the comments? Reynolds was quite the sh*t talkier and stirrer. Constantly denigrated people and the content while bragging he wasn’t afraid of using his real name.
It would be nice if Eater reset the Comments with each iteration of each list. Years-old comments are not really helpful and, rather, detract.
7 Likes