clairobscur, just FYI, in English, that bolded word would be either critique or criticism, preferably the former.
As noted in the original link:
“Here’s yet another business that, when confronted with a negative review, thought to itself, “Why not deter EVEN MORE potential patrons from ever considering setting foot in our establishment?” There are many ways to react to criticism, and Il Giardino, an Italian restaurant located in France, opted for “catastrophic.””
Apparently the restaurateur in going ballistic over a post in an obscure blog, never heard of the Streisand effect.
I’m reminded of a Chinese food restaurant that we used to go to years ago. They got cited for relatively minor violations by the Dept. of Health. Instead of just fixing them and moving on, the owner decided he’d been unfairly maligned and went on a crusade (complete with local media coverage) to right the wrong.
The restaurant closed not long after that. Apparently business did not boom following all the publicity.
The French word for *critique *is critic?
I expect he just didn’t know the English word for critique is also critique. Or it’s an autocorrect error.
In his defence it’s y’all’s fault for having an inconsistent language. You can critically critique a restaurant, which makes you (along with everybody :)) a critic, who may or may not be then criticized. What the hell is up with that ?
(whereas French, for once not being deliberately confusing as hell, is all about the critiques.* Un critique peut critiquer critiquement*).
I blame the French, for loaning us so many interesting and useful words (and at such a low interest rate).
It’s a valid criticism. The differences are critical.
Critical Restaurant Theory says this is all a plot to keep the proletariat food service establishment down.
Or she thought the attention she’d get from this lawsuit would net her more than €2,500.
I lol’d so hard I crit myself.
Is there a distinction made between a blogger (what I’d call a “citizen journalist”) and an established newspaper, with paper and ink and everything? Or is it just that if somebody says bad things about your business you get to sue them, regardless of where they sit?
In the U.S., one can always sue, even without grounds. The trick is winning in court.
Regarding the French case in the OP: can an American blogger, in viciously criticizing a restaurant, pretty much count on an American judge to summarily throw out such cases?
There is the case of American economics Mike “Mish” Shedlock being fined 8,000 euros for quoting French blogger Jean-Pierre Chevallier on the leverage of mega-bank Societe Generale. The bank disputed this so naturally the Financial Markets Authority (AMF) figured banks never lie and fined because free speech is not French. They haven’t collected any money from Shedlock but his lawyer has advised him not to visit France.
It depends on what the blogger is saying, and on whether it’s true. If it’s all statements of opinion (“this restaurant blows!”) then there is no liability. If there are false statements of fact (“this restaurant serves rotting beef”) then there is probably a valid libel action.
This thread is making me so hungry.
Thank you. Hope I will remember it.
Correct.
Being one of the 3/4 of British people, referenced here, who had never heard of legal insurance, I like the idea of having a crack team of lawyers eager and ready to fight for me for €50 a year.
Attack My Ducky Minions !
"The trouble with the French economy is they don’t even have a word for ‘entrepreneur’ "
-G.W. Bush
(OK, ok, he didn’t really say that, but it’s too good a fake quote not to repeat here.)
Meanwhile the restaurant, having deployed the nuclear option, is heading towards a state of critiqual mass.
Natural 20?