Menupages.ie - negative reviews are removed

AARRRGH · 13-10-2008 4:17pm #1

Hello

Has anyone else noticed this? Pleasant but negative restaurant reviews on menupages.ie get removed. For example, one of my reviews (which was very polite, but honest) was removed recently. I'm guessing as the restaurant I reviewed is a "premium" member, they can request anything negative should be removed?

youcancallmeal · 13-10-2008 4:21pm

Kind of defeats the whole purpose of the website :mad:
I did notice recently that reviews in general for a lot of places are usually rated at 3 stars and up. Very few 1/2 a star rating to be seen? Or maybe I've just been looking at genuinely good places?
If what your saying turns out to be true I'll definitely be a bit wary in future when looking at reviews, if I even look at all!

AARRRGH · 13-10-2008 4:28pm

Yep, I just asked a couple of my friends there and any negative reviews they've ever left have also been removed.

Totally defeats the purpose of the site. Oh well...

nava · 13-10-2008 4:58pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

Yep, I just asked a couple of my friends there and any negative reviews they've ever left have also been removed.

Totally defeats the purpose of the site. Oh well...

Very disapointed with that move, what's the point of leaving feedback.

Did you try to contact the website admins about it? love to know what they have to say about it.

dudara · 13-10-2008 5:19pm

Ditto what nava said. Have you tried to contact the website to ask about their policy?

Darragh29 · 13-10-2008 5:23pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

Hello

Has anyone else noticed this? Pleasant but negative restaurant reviews on menupages.ie get removed. For example, one of my reviews (which was very polite, but honest) was removed recently. I'm guessing as the restaurant I reviewed is a "premium" member, they can request anything negative should be removed?

The reason for this is because menupages.ie charge restaurants a monthly fee to participate in the website. Obviously they can't charge a restaurant to be up on the site and then have bad reviews.

ntlbell · 13-10-2008 5:28pm

Darragh29 wrote: »

The reason for this is because menupages.ie charge restaurants a monthly fee to participate in the website. Obviously they can't charge a restaurant to be up on the site and then have bad reviews.

This is not an excuse if you want to pay to be part of it then you take the good with the bad or you stay away from it...

It's nothing far from a disgrace..

Caryatnid · 13-10-2008 5:31pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

For example, one of my reviews (which was very polite, but honest) was removed recently.

Omg that's an absolute joke. Thanks for alerting us to this - I'll remember not to refer to this site if I want honest reviews.

Darragh29 · 13-10-2008 5:32pm

ntlbell wrote: »

This is not an excuse if you want to pay to be part of it then you take the good with the bad or you stay away from it...

It's nothing far from a disgrace..

I fully agree, it's an absolute joke, a website for rating restaurants that does the opposite, you couldn't make it up! Has anyone contacted them for an explanation???

ejmaztec · 13-10-2008 5:53pm

They probably wouldn't earn a bean, were they independent and impartial. I don't know how many review sites of any kind can be trusted, as anyone can sign up to give a review, even the business owner.

Crazy.

marknoonan1974 · 13-10-2008 6:12pm

a friend of mine manages a hotel and she gets emailed the reviews before they get put up on the site...

Scoobydoobydoo · 13-10-2008 6:31pm

When I saw this post I decided to check my reviews on Menupages, all my negative comments on various restaurants are still there. I can't remember how many stars I gave each one, so I can't say if any have been added or subtracted, but the words all seem to be there. To give you an idea, I've probably left about 30 reviews, with about 5 mainly negative - they're still there. I'd be very annoyed if they'd edited out the negatives, it would make the whole site a waste of time bothering with if you can't read honest reviews. I refer to it all the time so I hope this isn't how they mean to go on. I'll be watching for patterns!

youcancallmeal · 13-10-2008 7:22pm

I think tripadvisor.com has the right idea, they let you post your review of a hotel and if the hotel isn't happy they can respond and challenge it?

zAbbo · 13-10-2008 7:24pm

If your main revenue stream was advertising from Restaurants, it would be best to keep them happy.

Shameful if it is happening.

TheBigLebowski · 13-10-2008 7:36pm

Yep, one of my negative reviews removed. Nonsense. Won't be using the site again, that's for sure.......pity cos I used to enjoy it but now it's not worth reading reviews and the whole thing becomes pointless.

Darragh29 · 13-10-2008 8:00pm

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Yep, one of my negative reviews removed. Nonsense. Won't be using the site again, that's for sure.......pity cos I used to enjoy it but now it's not worth reading reviews and the whole thing becomes pointless.

This site won a Golden Spider Award last year. It says a lot about the judging process and the depth of review by the adjucators if a site that claims to review restaurants actually sensors out negative opinions, which in all reality is one of the key reasons why you would visit this site before going to a restaurant!

dudara · 13-10-2008 8:22pm

I think that out of about 50 reviews I've up on the site, that I was only ever really negative in one review. It's still there though.

frecklier · 13-10-2008 8:41pm

I saw a review on it over the summer that started something like (yes, in capitals) DREADFUL - DO NOT GO THERE. And it obviously hadn't been removed.
A friend of mine was rewriting the Rough Guide to Benelux countries about 10 years ago, and I went with him on one of his trips. He wasn't allowed to write anything negative either. If it was negative, he was told to just leave it out. The hotel we stayed in was absolutely appalling, but he wasn't allowed to say that, particularly as he was getting the room from them for free, organised by the local chamber of commerce or tourist board or something.

talkingclock · 14-10-2008 8:49am

marknoonan1974 wrote: »

a friend of mine manages a hotel and she gets emailed the reviews before they get put up on the site...

same here. the manager then got in contact with the gues to genuinely find out whats wrong. then the guest sometimes changed their minds after an apology.

loyatemu · 14-10-2008 10:16am

they should have a disclaimer on the site stating that restaurants can remove negative reviews. Otherwise they're giving an impression on impartiality that is incorrect.

on their "About Us" page they state "Try MenuPages.ie for a fast objective guide to eating out in Dublin." - clearly not objective though.

AARRRGH · 14-10-2008 10:40am

The restaurant I reviewed is one of their "premium" members. Perhaps if the restaurants pay a monthly fee they can remove reviews they don't like?

Oh, my positive reviews are still on the site btw.

I e-mailed the site yesterday. Yes my review was removed. They say I should contact the owner of the restaurant and they will try to rectify the bad experience I had.

What nonsense. My negative experience in that restaurant really happened and shouldn't be removed from the site.

Bye, bye menupages.

dudara · 14-10-2008 7:11pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

The restaurant I reviewed is one of their "premium" members. Perhaps if the restaurants pay a monthly fee they can remove reviews they don't like?

Oh, my positive reviews are still on the site btw.

I e-mailed the site yesterday. Yes my review was removed. They say I should contact the owner of the restaurant and they will try to rectify the bad experience I had.

What nonsense. My negative experience in that restaurant really happened and shouldn't be removed from the site.

Wow, that really negatively impacts my view of menupages.

ntlbell · 14-10-2008 8:06pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

The restaurant I reviewed is one of their "premium" members. Perhaps if the restaurants pay a monthly fee they can remove reviews they don't like?

Oh, my positive reviews are still on the site btw.

I e-mailed the site yesterday. Yes my review was removed. They say I should contact the owner of the restaurant and they will try to rectify the bad experience I had.

What nonsense. My negative experience in that restaurant really happened and shouldn't be removed from the site.

Bye, bye menupages.

Would it be possible to get a copy of that email?

I have an idea

Mac daddy · 14-10-2008 10:54pm

Just checked a couple of the ones i have done in the past couple of months one of them : The Barracuda was removed I gave it a one.

The second one for the The Gables in Foxrock gave it a one has also been removed.

However I can still see the review when you login and go to my previews they aren't on the page anymore though.
I blame the budget Tbh :-)
As for menupages they might as well take that site down if they are only going to post three plus star ratings and hiding the bad honest reviews.

K.O.Kiki · 14-10-2008 10:57pm

Brilliant!
Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?

the_syco · 14-10-2008 11:07pm

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Brilliant!
Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?

Yes Brain, but how will it get us free pizza in the barnyard? NARF!

jebuz · 15-10-2008 5:02pm

That is an absolute joke, what is happening in this country. Won't be using that site again.

Oryx · 15-10-2008 7:09pm

Ive just had a gander at the site (never knew about it before) and there are lots of negative reviews to be seen. Even on the premium accounts. It might be that reviews are removed upon request, and not everyone checks their listing and therefore, asks for reviews to be taken down. Either way, it seems the information on the site is not to be trusted.

Darragh29 · 15-10-2008 7:45pm

This website is owned by the same people who own Car Buyers Guide, the only Irish motoring website that is still illegally cold calling people who have a vehicle for sale in other Irish publications, so I wouldn't be at all surprised at the development we've seen on menupages.ie

AARRRGH · 16-10-2008 9:59am

Oryx wrote: »

Ive just had a gander at the site (never knew about it before) and there are lots of negative reviews to be seen. Even on the premium accounts. It might be that reviews are removed upon request, and not everyone checks their listing and therefore, asks for reviews to be taken down. Either way, it seems the information on the site is not to be trusted.

Yep, I suspect they remove negative reviews if the restaurant asks for them to be taken down.

This does mean the site cannot be trusted though, as who knows if that great sounding restaurant previously had a bunch of negative reviews?

zazzywandra · 16-10-2008 11:40am

Hi guys,

I'm the marketing manager with MenuPages.ie, my name is Sandra Egan and I'm interested in your comments - we love feedback be it good or bad.

What alot of you are saying here about MenuPages.ie is not correct

. We post every single review to the web site. We have a team of people that read the reviews before they go live and the only time a review won't be published in full is if it is litigious or obsence. So if you identify someone saying "the waitress, with red hair called Mary, was a stupid x and y" we won't be able to post that part of your review. We would be sued it we did. However we do post everything else including the food was crap, service poor etc.

I challenge you all to try it - I wouldn't stick my neck out if this wasn't the case. It is the backbone to the site and why it is so popular.

Just to cover a few other little things in the proceeding comments:

1. Darragh29 - you say restaurants pay us - every single restaurant that appears on the site appears free of charge. So what you say isn't correct. We do allow restaurants the ability to do extra advertising on the site but the starting point is full free listing for all. Otherwise the site wouldn't be comprehensive. There are restaurants that absolutely hate us because of us allowing users say their food is terrible - even people that pay us for extra banner advertising freak about bad reviews. But they stay live, no matter what. We do allow restaurants what we call "the right to reply" but not all take up the offer.

2. MarkNoonan1974 - you are correct - restaurants do get an email saying a review has been posted. However, this is when it is live on our web site - it is an automated system which is just to let them know someone has posted a comment. At the same time, our users get an email saying "your review of xx place has been posted". They don't have chance to moderate it - although I know they would love to in alot of cases

Feel free to let me know anything else that you like (or hate) about the site. We're an Irish business just trying to make our way - my email address in work is sandra@menupages.ie.

Thanks,
Sandra

AARRRGH · 16-10-2008 1:02pm

That is a lie.

I have an e-mail from your company saying the review was removed because the restaurant (a "premium" member) wanted it removed. Do you want me to post the e-mail?

The two negative things I said were -

1. The dessert was frozen and tasteless.
2. I left the restaurant feeling a bit angry as I paid a lot of money for very little food.

Again, your e-mail specifically says the restaurant asked for the review to be removed, and there is nothing litigious or obscene in my review.

All my friends have also had reviews removed, and I assure you they are decent people who would not say anything litigious or obscene.

Note my review was on your site for a few days, so obviously your company thought it was ok.

You are just going to make this situation worse by lying. We are not stupid.

Darragh29 · 16-10-2008 1:17pm

"Try MenuPages.ie for a fast objective guide to eating out in Dublin."

Quote from Menupages website link below:

http://www.menupages.ie/AboutUs

There's an obvious conflict of interest here that can't be reconciled by the company spokesperson. Putting the e-mail address at the end of the mail is just an attempt to drag exchanges into a private discussion by way of e-mail instead of having it here.

zazzywandra · 16-10-2008 4:34pm

Darragh, firstly, there is nothing sinister in putting my email up at all - I have received 2 great suggestions from other boards users from this thread who obviously have no problem with it. I'm happy to chat in public or private - whatever puts our users at ease.

Secondly, AARRRGH from your posting, I know who you are now and what happened in your case - you ate in EasT restaurant and after your review was posted the restaurant wanted to put things right and offered you a full free meal for you and a friend.

Most of the restaurants site take complaints very seriously and EasT seems to be no exception. It is our policy, in cases where restaurants offer to fix problems and to have diners back to their restaurant free of charge, to put a review on "hold", pending the outcome of the revisit to the restaurant. In most cases, our users write another review (overwriting the previous one). Where users do not take up the restaurants offer or where they do not write another review after the free night out, their original bad review is reinstated. In this case Darragh, you turned the restaurants offer down and we put your review back on the site - in totality and unamended.

I think it good form that restaurants make an effort to put things right when they have messed up. Most of our users are delighted at the chance to have their faith in the relevant restaurant restored.

On this occasion AARRRGH, you didn't let the restaurant do that - so your review was put back on the site.

After your comments and concerns I will amend our site Terms & Conditions to help users understand what we do and why we do it. I accept that we should have let you know about the offer of free dining before you emailed us - but you were very fast, you beat us to it and for that I am sorry.

Regarding your friends missing reviews, you should note that reviews over 300 days old fall off the restaurant page however they stay within the membership section where members can view their old reviews and update them at any time. The 300 day fall off is because reviews get old and out of date and this was deemed the cut off when the site was built 2 years ago. I will also note this in new T&C's on the site shortly so that there is full transparency on the site.

I am happy to post the email you received from us here myself where the general manager tried to put things right - we have nothing to hide.

I have to say, I'm not sure I and the web site deserve the beating up that you are giving us when this actually started with a restaurant just trying to do the right thing after you had a bad night out.

I will leave it with you,
Sandra

EMAIL FROM GENERAL MANAGER TO AARRRGH

" Dear XXX
I received your email enquiring about your review. The reason I removed your review was because I had been speaking with the owner of EAsT who has invited you and a friend back to the restaurant as his guest in order to try and rectify your poor experience.

This is standard practice and as you can see from 1000's of other negative reviews on the site we don't remove them because of poor star ratings!

The owners name is Moon and he is looking forward to hearing from you.

Regards
Richard Kavanagh
General Manager
Menupages.ie "

AARRRGH · 16-10-2008 5:01pm

zazzywandra wrote: »

Secondly, AARRRGH from your posting, I know who you are now and what happened in your case - you ate in EasT restaurant

Yep, that's me.

zazzywandra wrote: »

It is our policy, in cases where restaurants offer to fix problems and to have diners back to their restaurant free of charge, to put a review on "hold", pending the outcome of the revisit to the restaurant. In most cases, our users write another review (overwriting the previous one). Where users do not take up the restaurants offer or where they do not write another review after the free night out, their original bad review is reinstated. In this case AARRRGH, you turned the restaurants offer down and we put your review back on the site - in totality and unamended.

On this occasion AARRRGH, you didn't let the restaurant do that - so your review was put back on the site.

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt on this, but I had to contact you asking why my review was taken offline - you did not contact me offering me a free meal - you only offered me that after I complained.

Also, I have asked my friends if they ever got offered free meals after their negative reviews were removed, and none of them recall you ever contacting them.

zazzywandra wrote: »

Regarding your friends missing reviews, you should note that reviews over 300 days old fall off the restaurant page however they stay within the membership section where members can view their old reviews and update them at any time.

Fair enough, that sounds like a good system.

zazzywandra wrote: »

I have to say, I'm not sure I and the web site deserve the beating up that you are giving us when this actually started with a restaurant just trying to do the right thing after you had a bad night out.

No, you removed my negative review because the restaurant asked you to do so. I don't really believe your explanation above (as stated, none of my friends have every received offers of free meals, and I had to contact you) but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and hope going forward your policies are more transparent.

My intention wasn't to beat up your website, but rather, I have a strong dislike of dishonesty and things I consider to be unfair.

faceman · 16-10-2008 5:02pm

Great initiative Sandra in coming to boards to speak about menupages.ie.

From my own experience, i dont post reviews to the site but i do use it regularly for advise on where to go, its an easy to use site with great content.

I am however surprised that some reviews are removed in that fashion. While i completely agree that restaurants should be allowed to remedy a negative experience, I believe it should be left up to the reviewer to make the call on whether or not their review should be removed. After all, a revisit at the expense of the restaurant is an excellent gesture, doesnt change the fact that the reviewer's original experience was poor.

Perhaps a system where the suer agrees to amend or update their review on revisit may be more favourable. it maintains the integrity of reviewers and offers restaurants the opportunity to show that they take negative feedback seriously and strive to improve things based on the feedback.

I would have a higher opinion of a restaurant that had remedied a negative experience rather than a restaurant that had bog standard relatively positive reviews. If that makes sense.

Anyway thats my 2c. Hopefully it can be taken in a constructive fashion.

zazzywandra · 16-10-2008 5:09pm

Ok - I take both of your points on board and I commit to have amended T&C's on the site (in an obvious place) explaining how the site works within the next 4 weeks. You can hold me to it!

Thanks for the comments - I do appreciate them.
S

AARRRGH · 16-10-2008 5:11pm

Another thing on the negative experience being removed... it reminds me a bit of when restaurant reviewers warn a restaurant they'll be there that night. That's a bit of a cop out as the staff know to be on their best behaviour.

The fact of the matter is EaSt provided me with a fairly shoddy experience. If I went back for their free meal of course they are going to do everything to make sure I am happy.

So in my opinion that would not be a "real" dining experience, and cannot be compared to the real, negative experience I had a few weeks ago.

Darragh29 · 16-10-2008 6:17pm

Sounds to me like the rules are being made up as they go along. :rolleyes:

FYI, I didn't post any feedback on the website good bad or indifferent, because I don't rate the website at all, it's all over the place, poorly arranged and generally depressing to look at...

Hitchhiker's Guide to... · 16-10-2008 7:09pm

I started reading this thread thinking "those underhand feckers at menupages". But serious kudos to Sandra for coming on and explaining the reasons. It seems a very reasonable explanation, and any potential misunderstanding is now going to be cleared up in the T&Cs.

Let's give credit where credit is due ...

AARRRGH · 16-10-2008 7:53pm

Well, can anyone who has had their negative reviews removed (within 300 days) confirm they were offered a free meal (via menupages) in the restaurant they reviewed?

faceman · 16-10-2008 10:05pm

Darragh29 wrote: »

Sounds to me like the rules are being made up as they go along. :rolleyes:

FYI, I didn't post any feedback on the website good bad or indifferent, because I don't rate the website at all, it's all over the place, poorly arranged and generally depressing to look at...

Right, well why not offer some constructive criticism on how they can improve things?

AARRRGH wrote: »

Well, can anyone who has had their negative reviews removed (within 300 days) confirm they were offered a free meal (via menupages) in the restaurant they reviewed?

ultimately its up to the restaurant to offer the meal as opposed to menupages I expect.

AARRRGH · 16-10-2008 10:28pm

faceman wrote: »

ultimately its up to the restaurant to offer the meal as opposed to menupages I expect.

Sorry I meant has menupages contacted them on behalf of the restaurant offering a free meal in return for their negative review being taken offline. (I think that's what Sandra was saying happens.)

Btw, I hope it turns out a few people have been contacted, so this fairytale can have a happy ending.

eth0_ · 17-10-2008 10:55am

zazzywandra wrote: »

Secondly, AARRRGH from your posting, I know who you are now and what happened in your case - you ate in EasT restaurant and after your review was posted the restaurant wanted to put things right and offered you a full free meal for you and a friend.
.... It is our policy, in cases where restaurants offer to fix problems and to have diners back to their restaurant free of charge, to put a review on "hold", pending the outcome of the revisit to the restaurant. In most cases, our users write another review (overwriting the previous one).

So essentially you are allowing restaurants to bribe your users?

It's pretty black and white that that is what you are saying.

If I have a sh*t experience in a restaurant and I complain, I am unlikely to return for a free meal, and if I *were* to return, they're obviously going to pull out all the stops so I won't speak negatively of their establishment to my friends!

Therefore, people who re-write their review in a case like that are not being objective as they are not experiencing a "genuine" dining experience.

ntlbell · 17-10-2008 11:35am

what they could do is send out a gift voucher for the meal.

This way they wouldn't know it was you returning until it came to cough the cash stopping them from pulling out all the stops so you could get a genuine dining experience

But besides the point menu pages this behavior is a disgrace, it's one thing coming on to boards to listen and respond but it seems you have responded with more lies only making the matter look worse.

a disgrace

Welease · 17-10-2008 12:56pm

eth0_ wrote: »

So essentially you are allowing restaurants to bribe your users?

It's pretty black and white that that is what you are saying.

If I have a sh*t experience in a restaurant and I complain, I am unlikely to return for a free meal, and if I *were* to return, they're obviously going to pull out all the stops so I won't speak negatively of their establishment to my friends!

Therefore, people who re-write their review in a case like that are not being objective as they are not experiencing a "genuine" dining experience.

Actually i think it shows a good element of taking any criticism seriously. Mistakes happen and issues do arise, rather than ignore it the restaurants are offering a free meal as compensation. This costs them hard cash and is a much better response than a worded response on a web page.
If they are truely that bad, then they will be soon out of business giving away free meals. If not, then shouldnt they have the chance to respond and make good on the situation?

ntlbell · 17-10-2008 12:59pm

Welease wrote: »

Actually i think it shows a good element of taking any criticism seriously. Mistakes happen and issues do arise, rather than ignore it the restaurants are offering a free meal as compensation. This costs them hard cash and is a much better response than a worded response on a web page.
If they are truely that bad, then they will be soon out of business giving away free meals. If not, then shouldnt they have the chance to respond and make good on the situation?

They're not offering a meal because there was a problem with the meal.

they're now offering the meal because there were caught removing bad feedback from the website

huge difference..

Welease · 17-10-2008 1:03pm

ntlbell wrote: »

They're not offering a meal because there was a problem with the meal.

they're now offering the meal because there were caught removing bad feedback from the website

huge difference..

I thought Arrrgh had said that it had been confirmed plenty of people had been offered free meals, and he was now happy?

Seems like a decent enough process to me.. If you take the free meal the review is removed, but you are free to review it again. If not, then the review stays.. (although i may have missed something here

)

aidan_walsh · 17-10-2008 1:10pm

ntlbell wrote: »

They're not offering a meal because there was a problem with the meal.

they're now offering the meal because there were caught removing bad feedback from the website

huge difference..

Right...

It is our policy, in cases where restaurants offer to fix problems and to have diners back to their restaurant free of charge, to put a review on "hold", pending the outcome of the revisit to the restaurant. In most cases, our users write another review (overwriting the previous one). Where users do not take up the restaurants offer or where they do not write another review after the free night out, their original bad review is reinstated.

dahamsta · 17-10-2008 1:24pm

I don't agree that this is a good policy. The original review should remain, with a note explaining the ongoing process. If the reviewer adds a new review, the original should point to it. Anyone with a brain should realise that this is the most transparent and fair procedure.

adam

faceman · 17-10-2008 1:27pm

Of course the alternative to this big episode is that a "restaurant review" sub forum is created on boards...

Menupages.ie - negative reviews are removed

Comments