Food reviews

Meals blogger Seth Lui denies non-disclosure of paid meals evaluations and listings amid controversy

SINGAPORE: On Friday (6 Oct), Mr Seth Lui, the operator of a outstanding meals evaluate weblog, launched a press assertion relating to the current suggestions and issues raised on social media through a Fb submit by Ms Charlene Yan relating to their providers.

Mr Lui, 38, strongly denied accusations that his platform fails to reveal its acceptance of fee for restaurant evaluations.

He asserted that every one articles sponsored by advertisers are clearly marked as paid evaluations.

Responding to inquiries, a spokesperson for Mr Lui acknowledged on Thursday (5 Oct) that the blogger is conscious of a web-based submit circulating that accuses the meals weblog of that includes native eateries in its evaluations in change for fee.

The spokesperson emphasised, “The allegations are completely false.”

Ms Charlene Yan, 34, is the proprietor of an eatery in Everton Park within the Tanjong Pagar space.

In a Fb submit on Wednesday (4 Oct), Ms Yan revealed her shock at receiving an e mail from one among Mr Lui’s staff, which inquired about her curiosity in paying for a spot on a listing of the most effective locations to eat in Everton Park.

In response to the e-mail, offered as a screenshot in her submit, the supply was known as an “promoting effort.”

Her eatery might safe a random place on the listing for S$2,300, with the choice to pay a further S$400 to S$600 for placement in first, second, or third place.

This place could be assured for no less than one yr, and the bundle would come with a evaluate of roughly 150 to 200 phrases, together with a most of two photographs, and promotion on social media.

She would even have the chance to evaluate two drafts of the article and counsel revisions.

The e-mail offered examples of comparable lists that the blogger had compiled previously, together with Mr Lui’s Northpoint Metropolis meals information, which had garnered over 57,000 views.

Ms Yan criticized the cash-for-review supply as “incredulous” and raised questions concerning the authenticity of Mr Lui’s evaluations.

She asserted that she had not contacted Mr Lui earlier than receiving the supply.

In an interview with The Straits Instances, Ms Yan acknowledged, “I used to be shocked when was going to write down a brand new definitive article to say what is nice to eat in my neighbourhood with out really attempting the meals.

“My gripe is that they have been going to write down an article for which the principle criterion was cash, and with out full disclosure. And there have been so many different articles doing the identical factor for eateries in different neighbourhoods.”

I didn’t wish to simply ignore the e-mail as a result of I really feel that folks should know and be extra conscious of what they learn. Additionally it is time for bloggers to have larger requirements of integrity,” she added.

Mr Lui and crew addressing the difficulty

In response to inquiries, a spokesperson for Mr Lui expressed remorse for any confusion and frustration brought on by the submit.

The spokesperson emphasised that Mr Lui and his crew are devoted to transparency.

Addressing allegations of accepting fee from eateries for that includes them, the spokesperson clarified that Mr Lui contacts potential shoppers for that includes on his weblog solely after in depth analysis by his crew.

He added that paid collaborations start with a radical examination of social media platforms and Google restaurant scores to determine new and trending locations.

Mr Lui’s crew then decides whether or not an eatery is deserving of a suggestion to their readers.

The spokesperson defined, “In a shopper collaboration, a number of members of the crew would have visited them, understood extra about their story, tried the meals, after which written about it

If the meals high quality is way under common, we might nonetheless drop the shopper in order to not mislead our readers.”

As for the rationale behind Mr Lui probably charging an eatery, particularly when it’s extremely more likely to be featured, the spokesperson defined that paid collaborations supply supplementary benefits.

Ms Yan harassed the significance of clearly labeling paid ads as “sponsored” to take care of transparency. Nonetheless, she famous that within the cases of lists she was proven, there was no indication of sponsorship.

The spokesperson for Mr Lui clarified that the talked about lists didn’t embrace any sponsors. In different circumstances, a outstanding “disclaimer for branded or sponsored content material” is persistently positioned on the conclusion of the articles.

What’s additionally intriguing is a screenshot of what seems to be a current Fb submit by Mr Lui, responding to the current controversy.

Within the submit, he commented, ‘There’s no want for drama by taking a photograph of the salesperson who introduced the supply and posting it on-line. Nobody strong-armed you or tried to cheat you into it. Is it the ethical excessive floor you’re attempting to face on? Guess it created free PR for all of us.’

He added, ‘Quite a few companies have approached us without cost protection, but we’ve by no means shamed them on-line, even when their requests have been unreasonable.’

He concluded by saying, ‘Respect is a two-way avenue inbusiness.’”

Related Articles

Back to top button