Last Thursday the Twitterverse got all aflutter when news came that the Bristol had been selected by GQ’s Alan Richman as one of the best new restaurants in the country. Here’s how it went down: Ellen Malloy, a publicist who owns the website the Bristol uses for their PR, started the tweets like so:
THE BRISTOL IS ONE OF THE 10 BEST RESTOS IN CHICAGO ACCORDING TO GQ MAGAZINE!!!! WOOOOTTT!!!
Malloy quickly corrected herself—the list is of the best restaurants in the country, not Chicago—but she had already been retweeted copiously: This girl RT’d it, this guy RT’d it, this guy RT’d it, they RT’d it…there was a lot of chatter. Steve Dolinsky chimed in as well, sort of taking credit:
I’m glad Richman listened to me: congrats to Bristol for being the only Chicago rep on 10 Best Restos in GQ
What nobody was talking about was Nightwood—or, more specifically, Nightwood’s rigatoni with confit of mutton, which Richman selected as one of his top dishes of the year. Or HotChocolate’s Mindy Segal, which Richman wrote a nice blurb about. Even XOCO and Rick Bayless—both big topics on Twitter—were looked over, even though the cubano torta was named one of Richman’s favorite artisanal pork sandwiches. (The ever modest Bayless tweeted about the Bristol, but didn’t mention the kudos he himself received.)
Was this a matter of the Bristol’s props being somehow more noteworthy than the others? I guess that’s possible, though personally I think having one of the top five dishes is just as notable as being one of the top ten restaurants. But more than that, I think what happened on Twitter that day was indicative of a publicist using social media to bypass journalists and hit the general public itself. Malloy has over 3,000 followers on Twitter, and though I have no numbers to go by, I think we can safely assume that many of her followers are not journalists. Regular restaurant-going people follow Malloy because she doesn’t just represent food personalities—she’s become a food personality herself.
It’s a brilliant situation for publicity, because Malloy (and other publicists like her, though I don’t know of any with such a following) can generate buzz for her clients without having to use a journalist or story to do so. But I wonder if all of her followers know the score. Because her enthusiastic tweets come from her personal account (her company has a separate twitter account, and the two often tweet the same news), Malloy’s tweets could easily be taken as just that: Simple enthusiasm, without an agenda. And who knows, maybe a lot of her tweets are. After all, Malloy does tweet about restaurants that don’t use RIA. Though even then, one has to wonder if the motivation is signing more clients. So you see what I mean—it’s complicated.
Is it a problem? Not really. Malloy is a great businesswoman, and she’s just working hard for her clients. Besides, if one of her followers doesn’t realize that there may (or may not) be other motives at work, that’s their error—the onus is on us to examine the source from which we get our news.
But it does speak to a new and, for me, slightly itchy dynamic in the media. Publicists, restaurateurs, journalists and readers—we’re all playing in the same sandbox now. The traditional tiers of distributing information have been leveled. So now there’s more information, but a crucial tier—one that was supposed to separate those with an agenda from those without—is gone. And without it stories can get skewed.
So from my journalist’s chair, the people walking around knowing that the Bristol was named in GQ, but not that XOCO, HotChocolate and Nightwood (all of whom don’t send out press releases) are—they don’t know the whole story. In fact, they only know a quarter of it.
But from a publicist’s chair? Those people probably know everything they need to know.
Wait, I’m confused. I don’t see how Ellen Malloy’s motives are of any concern to anybody. She can do what she wants on Twitter. If she skews a story, who cares? You, or rather TOC, can come in and do whatever piece you want, and in that case you would have a responsibility. I’m a journalist, but I completely believe Ellen has zero responsibility to give this whole GQ story. Readers, though, are savvy enough to know that when it comes to certain journalists and publications, they are going to get a much more balanced view of a situation.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that I don’t see any of this as a problem at all (that is except for Dolinsky—who…journalists? Not? Still this debate?—skewed his own information). I’m no food cricket though, so I guess carry on.
TimeOut
Wow, David, thank you so much. I take this as validation that our little company, RIA, has started to make an impact. Such a long post and, it seems, not even the usual topic covered here.
We should start, though, with the actual fact that I found out about The Bristol in GQ from GrubStreet, with this tweet:
Yaaaay to The Bristol, which GQ named one of the 10 best new restaurants of 2009: http://bit.ly/6qlp3C
It is a bit ironic, of course, since GrubStreet is written by a journalist. I am not sure where to go with that, though I am sure it has implications on this topic.
But yes, I think this is a fantastic discussion to start.
I agree with you that the world has changed. Greatly. I for one started noticing that back in August 2007 when I started down this new path. I will admit I wasn’t entirely sure where it would lead me, but here we are, actively and aggressively trying to get the word out about our clients, as is our job. We’re actually building software that will hurtle our clients news out to every single outlet in every single way possible. It is our job.
But what you address is certainly a sticky point for a publicist to address, as much so as for you.
When you and I spoke about this last summer, I took a wait and see approach. Opting to err on the side of caution. Then, I noticed that there just weren’t as many places to pitch the clients’ stories, as many journalists to write, as many freelancers who could push a story through, or, even as many outlets as there used to be.
Then I had some odd experiences. One in particular where we were asked to refrain from developing a microblog for our client because a journalist asked us not to as they have been working on a story for weeks. I chose to pull the blog project, again, acting with an abundance of caution. My client got no mention in the story, to my knowledge. Not that I expected or asked for them to get special treatment. But I had to wonder, had I served my client?
This discussion has been brewing under the surface for months now, thanks for getting it out in the open. I do hope everyone reads it and comments on it and am sad you wrote it and then hightailed it on vacation as I am eager to hear more!
It’s always been eminently clear to me that Ellen Malloy is a publicist. I believe her personal twitter profile lists RIA as her website. If that should get bypassed by a follower, the access she gets and tweets alone (i.e. live tweeting Publicans first brunch along with Paul Kahan) make it pretty clear.
You can also look at it this way: I, another restaurant marketing and PR professional, am now reading this blog post, which I missed yesterday because I was traveling, directed to by a tweet I just picked up from a journalist (previously mentioned). Better yet– all of Alan Richman’s original content is again refreshed for me (and when I get back to Chicago I want to try that Nightwood dish). Now I will forward this link on… Super interesting discussion!
So, let me get this straight… Ellen found out about her client being in GQ and, obviously excited (she admitted she was so excited that she tweeted wrong) throws up an excited tweet… and you find fault with that? And wait, you find fault that people are out there trying to help their businesses by getting the word out? This whole thing seems like you are just whining in your ivory tower. Could this possibly be a view into why journalism is really dying?
Ellen, “hightailed” doesn’t even begin to describe it. I was running for my life. But a little holiday called Christmas can’t keep this Jew away from a good media debate.
You are right to feel validated. I think that what you do is brilliant (and I mean that in the most literal way). And Steve, I agree with you completely that there is nothing “wrong” going on here. I tried to make that clear in my post, but if it wasn’t, let me do it again here: To my mind, everything is on the up and up.
The question is, when does the “up and up” shift? Journalists are the only people bound by journalistic ethics. But what about when publicists start acting more like journalists? Breaking stories, putting the news out directly to the public, etc? So far it seems like we’re all in agreement that the responsibility falls to the reader to deduce what’s a story and what’s a promotion. Is that the extent of the solution? Maybe it is. But many, many publicists are going to start following Ellen’s lead–they’d be fools not to–so I think the question is worth asking now.
Unfortunately, as Ellen pointed out, the example I used to illustrate this point (the GQ thing) is flawed. Apologies all around. That’s what happens when you write a blog post when you really have buche de noel on the brain. But I’m relieved to see that the bigger points were not lost.
As a journalist, I think we should start trying to learn from Ellen and what she is doing instead of fighting it. She saw her industry is in peril (if media is, so is PR) and she has risked everything to adapt to the new realities of the world. Maybe we should too.
The one thing you seem to miss, David, is that all the posturing that media make to pretend to be unbiased is for your own good. Those of us in the public not only don’t believe you are not biased, the more you pretend you are the more we think you aren’t. It is probably MORE honest to follow the news of a publicist who admits she is a publicist than to follow the news of a journalist who posts what they think is important. I follow Ellen BECAUSE she doesn’t filter her news. She posts so much news about restaurants, she has become my go-to source for restaurant stuff in this city. All the best restaurants are on her site and I find out about places I wouldn’t know about otherwise because people like you don’t seem care about them or like them.
A righteous piece from David regarding Twitter and its ever-escalating potential. It seems by the minute, Ellen amasses new followers, and by tweeting enthusiastically about her clients, she’s using this to her benefit wisely and getting the most PR potential she can for them, hitting on all cylinders (Twitter, which links to RIA with client news items, which is echoed on Facebook, etc.).
This certainly speaks to the fact that PR has changed, and rapidly so, seeing as publicists, journalists, diners and so forth are all “playing in the same sandbox.” Ellen is more than aware of this and taking advantage of social media opportunity by jumping on a client-related news announcement and announcing it as quick as she can, in an arena where she can get the most hits in the soonest amount of time: Twitter.
When I read a post like this I always circle around to the same idea that Ellen is onto something huge. I think that sometimes companies use their own personal twitter for business means, but at the same time, in Ellen Malloy’s case, it seems to be a lot of personal info too. She isn’t just selling a product or her clients, she’s chosen to allow her crazy life to become privy to the public (twitter/fb) eye. Perhaps this helps her clients or perhaps it doesn’t. On Twitter, we subscribe to what we want to see, not what we are forced to see. The fact that Malloy has so many followers must mean that a lot of people are interested in what she actually has to say…
Agreeing with what Jeffrey said above, I wouldn’t have found this blog post if it hadn’t been making it’s way around the twitter world. The news we want is finding us. From what I’ve read and know I’m pretty sure Malloy’s company is riding the wave of the future and making sure her clients aren’t left behind in the dust. Congrats on a shout out to a truly innovative PR company. Way to not stick your head in the sand and ignore what’s happening around you!
I follow @EllenMalloy on twitter and while I know she is some sort of a restaurant PR person, she is also an incredibly great source for food knowledge and just fun information. I mean her entire personality online is about fun and about calling it like it is. I trust her opinion on restaurants and food and she always points out good articles as well. My favorite is when she causes intense discussions about relevant points that people usually want to ignore… like whether media should be allowed eat for free when reviewing a restaurant, or even an everyday blogger. Ellen on twitter is just pure fun, sometimes she does retweet her companies twitter, but it’s always with the Ellen flair I’ve come to expect and love about her on twitter.
Great topic. I think that the issue of unrestricted, undefined media feed will force critics and representatives to adapt, given the passiveness of the public. Realistically, people should be researching the background of political candidates, but many just vote (if at all) for the guy who shook their hand that morning when they got on the El. Let’s assume that the public won’t make efforts to become aware of who’s opinions are motivated by what, even if that’s where the onus should fall in a perfect world.
Critics’ words have always mingled with those of advertising/PR/Marketing Reps and the public in almost every industry that calls for critique (ie, sliced up quotes in an ad for every film ever made), like it or not. Seems like the arena has not changed, except for its format. But in this new online feed format, the noticeable difference is that posts are designed to start discussion, rather than becoming definitive. Back and forth is a heckuva lot more likely, simple, and effective than after a resto review on this site. By sheer numbers, how many people comment on TOC’s reviews, and far more importantly, how many people read those comments? I think it must be fewer than those who can do a quick search on Twitter to watch a whole discussion unfold. So, while people tend not to get the facts responsibly from unbiased sources, they do tend to adapt to the latest technology.
Every element here has to promote itself. Ellen has to build her business. Restaurants have to survive in a saturated economy. Given all of this, fair or not, doesn’t the onus then fall on the publications of critics? Isn’t it their responsibility to single out the words of their employees, to define them to the public as THE resource to trust, to separate them from the dizzying rush of information to which we’re now all privvy?
David, glad your back from vacation to weigh in.
I learned about the value of breaking news to followers before media from Barack Obama. He announced his candidacy to his constituents first, media second. I study his marketing tactics and try to learn from them as he really changed the game for all of us.
But no, I don’t think that makes me a journalist. I did go to jschool and worked as a journalist in London. But I don’t play on on TV or on Twitter.
All this does is prove the old adage, “PR, good or bad, is better than no PR at all.” PR/publicity are alive and well in both traditional and digital media.
Having read your article three times now, I am at a loss as to what your point in writing this post might be, and I’m confused with what your beef with Ms. Malloy is (as it appears many other commenters are). By omitting a congrats to Nightwood (or the other joints/dishes), she wasn’t extending a middle finger in their general direction–just applauding The Bristol for its appearance on the list. I don’t recall her tweeting “All other Chicago restos can SUCK IT!!” or “Go screw yourself, Segal!” She was simply celebrating the accomplishments of a notable Chicago eatery, with no disrespect to the others that appeared on the ancillary lists.
Further, I feel like you’re implying Ms. Malloy has some sort of hidden agenda in tweeting kudos to the Bristol, which I find incredulous. She lists her RIA affiliation right on her Twitter page, so her followers are well aware. Further, having followed her tweets for months, I can’t believe that anyone would accuse her of bullshitting–she represents excellent restaurants, stands behind each client, and her authenticity/expertise explain why she has 3K loyal followers.
Maybe Nightwood would have been a best restaurant and not just a best dish if they had been smart enough to hire her.
it’s great to see the continued growth of grassroots PR. It works - no questions asked!
Ellen Malloy represents my restaurant and I am so grateful for everything she does for us. She understands that getting people in the door to eat at my restaurant is more important than anything else.
And she is always harping on me that the only way to get people in the door is to be better.
It’s not easy to work with her. I got a bad review from your publication and when I called her to ask what I should do, she answered me: looks like you should make better food. I hung up on her. And then I started making better food.
Maybe the reason why she has so many followers and other publicists don’t, why she has so many great restaurants clients and other publicists don’t, is because she actually is honest and tells it like it is and makes restaurants better by all the suggestions and cut-through-the bullshit conversations she has.
She is probably the greatest gift to restaurants in this city. I can’t say the same about Time out.
Lots of commenting going on so I feel I should add my two cents. I think the restaurant appearing in GQ is a product of two very important things. First - the restaurant is awesome, the food insane and it speaks wonders for it’s self. The other being Ellen’s PR company RIA. From what I understand journalists can access information that is readily available, meaning no more digging around and hoping for a story… leading to anyone who wants to write about how awesome the bristol is to already have material waiting for them.
I also kind of want to add, @ellenmalloy is by far one of my favorites on twitter to follow. I’m not saying that her saying “eat here” doesn’t get me to go, but I trust her - because she tells it how it is. She isn’t saying everyone who isn’t her clients sucks, and everyone who is her client rocks but is literally saying, this is awesome for this reason. You should check it out. Also I live in Chicago and really the only way I keep up with restaurants is using the news feature on the restaurantintelligenceagency.com website.
This post is pretty confusing because there’s a ton of circling and misdirecting without actually saying the author really wants to make clear. And that’s “Journalists are the sole gatekeepers that should distribute information about — and sway people to — restaurants and bars.”
The faster traditional media accepts the inevitable shift in the way messages are delivered the more efficient the delivery will become. Whatever Ellen’s intentions were to post about the Bristol should be overshadowed by the fact that we’re more concerned over her saying it than gq. Besides, haven’t the lines of news and PR been blurred? Really what’s the difference? At this point in time where news is constant, if rather get my Chicago restaurant news from someone directly affiliated with the restaurant than a journalist…
Oh by the way, big star (another Ria client) was mentioned too…
Wow. Thanks, y’all. I am overwhelmed with appreciation for the support and encouragement.
We’ve worked really hard to be honorable and honest in our dealings with everyone and are just trying to make the world of restaurants we represent a better place. We go to great lengths to make sure the news we put out about our clients is accurate and interesting - that it is valid, actually. I guess I am reading that we do an OK job with that and should keep pushing forward!
What a great Christmas gift! Thanks!
I am not sure what the point is? Is it lamenting the role of social media in how restaurants promote themselves? Or, are you saying that Bristol received the accolades it did nationally because it had a PR driven message and the others didn’t?
The fact is that social media, like Twitter and Facebook, have done wonders in keeping the restaurants name out there. 10 years ago, a chef promoted themselves several ways: Restaurant reviews, hope for mentions in the papers or magazines, in-store demonstrations, or wake up at some ungodly hour to do a 3 minute cooking demo on a local morning show. Obviously, I am simplifying things here, but you get the point: It was work to get your name out there. With Twitter, the world is literally at your fingertips, you can promote specials (as Bristol does) or answer cooking questions (like Bayless) or talk about where they will be appearing (Flay, Emeril). Others, actually pull back the curtain to their restaurant to show the makings of a dish (Bayless, Achatz come to mind).
I live in the western burbs and I wouldn’t have kept up with the restaurant scene in Chicago if it weren’t for Twitter. I have become more aware of the “hot” spots and restaurant openings and here is the thing: I have actively sought out these places because of my interaction with them on Twitter. I am not going to Chicago Magazine anymore to see what they have to say about a restaurant.
I recently went on a trip to NYC, and I asked, on Twitter, of restaurant recommendations, and I had multiple responses within seconds. What were we doing 10 years ago?
Just as restaurants cannot expect to sustain their business by putting out the same dishes every day, they can’t expect to get publicity the same way. They will need to understand and adapt to market themselves using the avenues that the population uses.
I found out that Chicago magazine also only posted something about the Bristol getting in GQ
Which makes me wonder what your agenda was in attacking Ellen? You obviously had one, even though you say that because you are a journalist you don’t.
Oh, and Ellen didn’t tweet about that.
And now that I’ve taken a nap, I want to say the arrogance of journalists who believe they should be the “sole gate keepers to sway information” is very disturbing. If I listened to music critics about what albums to listen to I’d have about 1/61375134646th of the itunes library.
Personally, I don’t Tweet, Facebook or blog about anything, and I could care less about everyone who does. So that this story filtered down to a “leave me out of your Twitter bullshit” cook like me speaks to the power of which I avoid. I’m not really clear what all the fuss is. (Which does add some validity to my social media sideline attitude) But outside peeking in….Mr. Tamarkin strikes me as a cry baby. Who cares that Ms. Malloy broke a story, or a Tweet about her clients current fortune in GQ, albeit without also pimping some other cats “dish.” Is she supposed to wait for someone in the print media, you know, a “real” journalist, to share the information in a “sandbox” that’s more reliable for the restaurant going public, like TOC for example? If so, then what the hell is instant social media for? Seems to me that Ms. Malloy did a great job for her client. She shared timely and important information that surely drove restaurant traffic. When I open another restaurant, I hope Ms. Malloy will take my money. I’m guessing Ms. Malloy’s list of Twitter followers will be growing with all this attention. Ain’t the future cool?!
There is a gross misconception that the media is objective. This post points out that with a level playing field of the disseminators of information that “a crucial tier—one that was supposed to separate those with an agenda from those without—is gone. And without it stories can get skewed.”
Such a statement is naive and lacks historical perspective. It is impossible to be objective because everyone writes from his or her experience, perspective and knowledge base. So the theory of objectivity is not only elusive but flawed at the onset, especially when it comes to food writing.
It’s no wonder that consumers no longer see traditional media as the experts. In fact, study after study shows that the Expert is anyone who has an opinion and wants to voice it.
With so much access to information today, the burden lies with the consumer to determine whether the source is reliable. Obviously, the number of Ellen Malloy’s Twitter followers is a testament to her validity and trustworthiness.
Wow—this might be the most bizarre (but strangely thought-provoking) comment thread I’ve witnessed in a long time. I’m just hopping in to see if we can get it on track.
Here’s the short version: Publicists do publicity. Journalists write. GQ is a magazine. Twitter is voodoo.
Now the long:
I’ve known some music publicists for almost two decades and a great many of them are dependable, hardworking, wonderful people. I’ve even done PR, as a contractor, for a month or two in a totally unrelated industry. It was great fun and great writing exercise. But come on people, PR people are, in a large part, paid to generate positive press, control information and produce stories with a certain slant. By definition, they’re not objective—and often they’re not even pretending to be. I wouldn’t want an objective publicist for my restaurant or my band—would you? A PR person should obviously be twittering about a client getting positive press in a national men’s magazine—that’s the kind of thing YOU WRITE A PRESS RELEASE ABOUT. That’s a publicist doing a publicist’s job—and hey, if a client gets that kind of press, the publicist should be excited about it and want to tell the world. Also, a PR person is under no compulsion to present information about non-clients. Again, would you want your paid spokesperson twittering about someone else’s restaurant even from a personal account? I wouldn’t. If I hire a publicist for something in the future—and I may—I’m certainly hoping they pass on all the positive news about me and my whoknowswhat. In this case, the publicist is using technology to her client’s advantage, which is precisely what I’d expect a smart publicist to do.
Is it just me or are some of these comments actually confirming what David Tamarkin points toward in his post? That Twitter makes it hard for readers to separate people-generated buzz from PR-generated buzz? I don’t think David is attacking anyone—he’s anticipating an issue that I’m sure we will see popping up elsewhere.
As Tamarkin points out, the onus is on the reader to know where information is coming from—but really, interpreting any media requires some knowledge of slant associated with the source. If we’re not even trying to notice the difference, then as readers we’ll probably deserve what we get—more slant or advertorial. If we demand objectivity, we’ll get more of that. But, hey, if you’re not demanding it, you certainly can’t complain when you get straight-up rewritten PR, can you?
But Twitter makes that more difficult—it puts the power to Tweet to many in the hands of the popular without giving one much of a clue who’s passed it on to those you are following.
As a writer, I have a healthy respect for what PR can and can’t do for myself and the reader—often it makes my job easier, sometimes it makes it impossible. Kid Sister, why did your album take so long? We’ll never know. But I know what she just had for lunch.
PR people, are, like music A&R people and unlike most journalists, often personable, intelligent, well-spoken and charming—they try to place stories, and we write stories. You may not be able to tell the difference—but keep one word in mind: Client. PR people have ‘em, journalists don’t.
And foie, why does Malloy get all the credit for kicking you into gear and not Time Out? You said yourself that a lousy review and your publicist helped you start cooking better. “It’s not easy to work with her. I got a bad review from your publication and when I called her to ask what I should do, she answered me: looks like you should make better food. I hung up on her. And then I started making better food.” I’ve never heard a better argument for tough reviews and working with a blunt publicist. Maybe you should journal more.
And doesn’t this whole discussion confer a certain prestige on old-school journalism? I mean, we’re talking about a GQ article—not a GQ tweet.
Speaking of PR, GQ is getting some nice buzz out of this. Save Conde Nast! And props to david & john for noting that the playing field has been leveled but that we pr people will still always give a “woot” for our clients and journalists will always fact-check. Play on!
David’s whole accusation falls apart now that Ellen’s noted that she got her Bristol info from another journalist. (The link in her original tweet goes right to Grub Street, not even to GQ.) And honestly I’d guess the reason Chicago Magazine didn’t include the other restaurants is because as a longtime reader of Chicago food media I’ve noticed that Dish tends to pick up information from other blogs all the time without crediting them, and probably just lifted it from Grub Street without picking up their own copy of GQ to see if there was more to the story.
What Ellen does is good for her clients, and that’s her job. If Time Out wants people to come to them for information, to pick up a metaphor from Foie upthread, they need to cook better food.