frmichelin1-3, Exercise 3: Inspector-based and reader-based rating

Model answer (check the details):

| | Inspector-based (Michelin) | Reader-based (Good Food Guide, online reviews) |
|---|---|---|
| Strengths | Trained, consistent judges; anonymity can limit special treatment; one method across a whole country or many | Large numbers of opinions; reflects what ordinary diners value, including price and service; open to many places |
| Weaknesses | A small number of judges, with tastes and limits; secret process; no published reasons; covers only some places | Uneven standards; can be biased, mistaken or manipulated; small restaurants may have few reports |
| Who can check | Only the company; outsiders see only the result | Anyone can read the reviews, though few check their truth |

Which for which purpose: for a special occasion at the top end, where the quality of the cooking matters most, a trained inspector's view is useful. For an everyday meal, a good local choice or for value, reader reviews and local knowledge are often more useful. A sensible diner uses both.

Care: this is a general comparison. The quality of each system differs by country and year, and the evidence for these claims is limited (check).