A TV show I enjoy tuning into is Restaurant Impossible. To
those who may be unfamiliar with it, the show revolves around all-star chef,
Robert Irvine (pictured to the left), who goes to failing restaurants and tries to save them in two
days with a $10,000 budget. This often involves improving customer service,
redesigning menus, improving kitchen cleanliness, improving marketing, and/or redesigning
restaurant.
One of the patterns I have noticed on the show is that many
of these failing restaurants have filthy kitchens. But last week, I saw the
most extreme and appalling version of filth when I watched the episode called
“Anna Maria’s” in which Chef Irvine tried to fix a restaurant that bears this name
in Dumore, Pennsylvania. Among the problems noted during the show were a)
layers and layers of food and grease covering stove tops, pots, overhead vents,
and kitchen appliances (which included a pot on the stove that was caked in so
much black grime it looked like something you would find in a dungeon); b)
bacteria, slime, and old food on the floors, and behind/under/on restaurant equipment,
c) filthy refrigerators with open containers of food, and c) a basement with
food (e.g., flour) stored next to chemicals. Of all the shows, I never saw Chef
Irvine so upset. He nearly vomited in the kitchen on screen and suggested that
he actually did vomit later in the show. I could go on describing the horrors
of this kitchen but you really have to see the show to believe it.
The advertisement for the show on my DVR said that the kitchen
had not been cleaned in about 25 years. I am not sure if that was hyperbole,
but regardless, the kitchen clearly had not been cleaned in a long time. When I
heard this and saw the state of the kitchen, I was shocked and upset that the
government could allow a restaurant to continue to serve food to the public
like this and put them at risk of food poisoning (e. coli). But I was even more shocked when I read an article
stating that the restaurant actually passed a health inspection nine months
prior. The restaurant owner’s son claims that the Food Network exaggerated the
state of the restaurant for the purposed of TV.
While I am fully aware the not everything on TV is how it
seems, it simply stretches all credulity for me to believe that the Food
Network planted the dirty pots, coated the kitchen equipment with
bacteria-laden slime, made the refrigerators filthy, planted old food behind
equipment, and brought food in the basement to put it next to chemicals. There
is too much evidence the other way, such as that a) the chef (Rudy) said on
camera that the kitchen had been in that condition for four years, b) the owner
and her son allowed Irvine to send customers home after he tossed out a filthy
stove vent for them to see, c) the owner and son admitted that the kitchen had
fallen into an embarrassing state, d) the show normally does not spend this
much time focused on kitchen clean-up needs, e) no one has sued the Food
Network over false presentation, f) Chef Irvine genuinely appears to want to
help people, and g) the visual evidence of the state of kitchen clearly
indicates this was a process that took a very long time to create.
It is all too easy to blame the Food Network for
exaggerating the state of restaurant as part of some type of conspiracy theory.
How about two alternative and more parsimonious explanations: 1) The restaurant
owners are embarrassed and understandably concerned that no one is going to
come to their new restaurant after seeing an expose of it on television (which
is a public relations disaster) and so they blame the Food Network for
exaggerating it as a form of damage control; 2) The Health Department is not
doing their job.
Explanation number one does not need a further explanation,
but consider number two a bit further. Not only did this restaurant pass health
explanation nine months prior, but not a single violation or risk factor was
found. How can that possibly be true? It is possible that the inspection was
either never done but signed off on or that an inspector signed off on the
report knowing there was a deficiency. Why would that be? Sometimes, restaurant
owners have political connections with health inspectors that allows the
process to be circumvented. This is more likely to be the case in small cities
such as the one this show was filmed in.
All in all, I now have no confidence that health inspections
mean anything and have become increasingly careful about the types of
restaurants I frequent, preferring to go to ones with an open kitchen that I
can see for myself or ones where I can peak into the kitchen. If I cannot see
the kitchen, then I use proxy indicators such as how clean the bathrooms are,
floors, tables, walls, ceilings, the dining ware, the staff, and the food as an
indicator of the state of the kitchen. State, county, and city governments need
to revisit the health inspection process to make reforms so that the process works as
intended and the public can once again have confidence in how the system
works. I also believe there should be a law that allows customers to view the
kitchen of restaurants before placing an order.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are welcome.