Drivers and pedestrians love to point to bad behavior from cyclists as if they themselves follow all traffic rules and regulations.
Drivers don’t run red lights or blow stop signs at the rate cyclists do, but they break other rules frequently. Some examples of frequent driver bad behavior:
Speeding
Slow rolling through stop signs rather than coming to a complete stop
Failing to yield to pedestrians, cyclists, and other drivers
Entering an intersection when there’s not enough room to clear it and then “blocking the box”
Using cell phones
Double parking
Illegal U turns
Pedestrians are hardly angels either. Drivers don’t complain about jay walking pedestrians nearly as much as they do cyclists running stop signs. Yet, jay walking is far more frequent, no question. Spend some time in Midtown during the day and you’ll often see entire crowds of pedestrians jay walking and forcing cars who have right of way to slow down, stop, or even miss an entire traffic light. Yet there are no mass calls for “scofflaw pedestrians”to be reigned in and regulated. But the moment many drivers see a cyclist break a rule that doesn’t even impact them, they grip their steering wheels in anger and wish they could banish all bicycles from the face of the Earth.
Cyclists deserve space on the road just as much as cyclists or pedestrians do.
Why is everyone so concerned about the few bad apples on bikes, that they believe cyclists do not deserve bike lanes? Cars run red lights, park on sidewalks, double park (Ever gone down Steinway St? It's a nightmare). Should they be deprived of roads?
Do pedestrians deserve to walk in the street because many of them jaywalk?
If you give cyclists a lane to safely travel on, there's less need for them to become entangled with cars and pedestrians. Plus, safer lanes of travel will convince more people to ditch cars, taxis, crowded subways, even the sidewalk, to get out and enjoy their city via bicycle! The pros of cyclists having their own lane vastly outweighs the cons, which are few.
1
History shows that adding protected bike lanes increases safety for ALL road users:
https://www.vox.com/2014/9/8/6121129/bike-lanes-traffic-new-york
1
Roads were made for cars. Bikes SHARE them. If you ride in the street , you take your chances. Why take away OUR lanes because you dont feel safe? You werent invited to our roads in the first place. You DONT have the same right to ride on our roads as we do. Take your tricylce to a bike path.
@James Caldwell You’re mistaken on the origin and purpose of NYC streets. Paved “Macadamized” streets began appearing just after the Civil War (30-40 years prior to the invention of the automobile). Among their primary proponents in NYC were bicycle groups -- paved streets were much easier than cobblestone streets to ride on. Also keep in mind that the commissioners plan of 1811 (which established Manhattan’s grid system) arrived about 80 years before the invention of the automobile, and over 100 years before its population.
As the macadam construction method became popularized at the turn of the 20th century, many local residents voiced opposition to street improvements over concern for reckless drivers.
So to correct your statement: Roads were made for bikes and pedestrians. Cars SHARE them.
1
It's odd that the New York Times asks whether cyclists deserve a space on our streets without asking how pedestrians and drivers earned their space.
If space were provided only for modes of transportation whose users follow the rules, there'd be no streets, no bike lanes, and no sidewalks.
Pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers break traffic laws all the time, but it is only drivers who are doing the killing, the polluting, the honking, etc.
In 2017, there were nearly 60,000 traffic injuries and 214 fatalities involving at least one motor vehicle on our city's streets.
Given drivers' terrible track record, the better question is: why is nearly 80% of our street space dedicated to them?
11
@Brian: Because you can't supply the businesses, stores, and residents of Manhattan on delivery bikes, that's why! What do you think it would cost to buy a bottle of seltzer if seltzer were brought into Manhattan, one or two cases at a time, by bike? Do you think Whole Foods or Trader Joe's can just have an endless stream of bike deliveries pulling up at their doors 24/7?
3
There's more than enough room for pedestrians, cyclists, buses, trucks, and commercial vehicles on our streets. That is, once we get all the private vehicles off them.
4
@Brian: It's still a free country, and if someone can afford a private vehicle, that's their right. Same as if someone can afford to take a taxi, that's their right - unless you think there should be NO taxis of any kind available; that we need to get taxis off the streets.
Somehow the rich are always allowed their limos and SUV's, though... they're not on bikes, are they?
2
BIKE GAZING
Bicycles fly with silent zooms,
Cleanest mode of travel,
Spewing forth no toxic fumes,
Greenest beyond cavil.
See him zipping down a one-way,
Munching on a snack--
Righteous Biker going his own way,
Bang! You're on your back.
5
If you want better behavior from people on bikes, build better bike lanes.
Part of the reason it may seem like people on bikes break rules is because even with the growth of cycling there are still too many spots all over the city where cycling is dangerous. The fact that the city is just now proposing its first set of crosstown protected bike lanes is one sign of that; until this goes in there's no way to ride across Manhattan without encountering dangerous traffic, blocked painted bike lanes, and intersections that are not designed to be crossed by people who aren't encased in tons of glass and steel.
Let's remember also that most of the people who died riding a bicycle last year were, by all accounts, obeying the law when they were killed. It was the drivers who were doing something they shouldn't have been doing: passing someone too close or operating a bus or truck on a street where no such vehicles are allowed without a permit.
If losing a few parking spaces leads to fewer people getting killed, that makes the choice to install more bike lanes a moral one. People's lives matter more than car storage.
11
@Doug: If you want better behavior from people on bikes, then require bike riders to have a license & insurance, b/c clearly the "honor system" isn't working. If you wouldn't do it in a car, then don't do it on a bike: run red lights, drive the wrong way on a one-way street, etc.
You say "Part of the reason it may seem like people on bikes break rules is..." Uh, no, it doesn't *SEEM* like people on bikes break rules; it's that they actually *DO* break rules and most of them break rules very, very regularly! Which is why they are such a problem.
Let's not forget the lady in Central Park who died b/c of a careless bike rider - what was her life worth? Less than a bike rider's? I don't think so.
Yes, people's lives matter - and ALL people's lives matter far more than giving in to bike riders' petulant insistence that they "need" special protections, but they still won't be bothered obeying the rules!
4
Licensing and insurance didn't prevent our city from having enormously high traffic death tolls just a few decades ago.
In 2016, there were 241 fatalities, 59,987 injuries, and 44,865 hit-and-runs in New York City. Of those hit-and-runs, only 510 resulted in an arrest. Of the 61 hit-and-runs that caused death or serious injury, an arrest was made in 28 cases.
Bicycle insurance and licensing is a red herring proposed by people who have no solutions to offer for the violence on our streets, but complain about the traffic calming achieved through Vision Zero, a key part of which are bike lanes.
4
@Brian: Do you work for De Blasio, or for Transportation Alternatives?? Because "traffic-calming" is TRULY the ultimate red herring! First the city creates congestion, then says we need "traffic calming"! To which I say: Horsefeathers! NYC would never be a world-class city if not for vehicular traffic. Even everyone's beloved trope, Amsterdam, has plenty of cars & trucks.
The absolute resistance by bike riders to ANY form of identification or licensing - their absolute resistance to ANY form of responsibility! - is the true measure of how much bike riders are unwilling to do THEIR part in keeping pedestrians safe in this city.
2
WAITING FOR VERDICT
The waiter recognized the critic
At dinnertime that night
And praying for the best, he pleaded,
"Is anything all right?"
6
Love this, Leon!
1
Here’s what didn’t work in east 50s:
1) the avenues are choked by overload to and from a major bridge and tunnel that are street dependent for on off ramps; the avenues also become the overspill for arteries north when the fdr is gridlocked; the side streets all have issues, with 3 crosstown bus routes on 49, 50, 57, an off ramp dumping onto 53, on ramp approaches clogging 56 to 63 while also handling bridge traffic... yet the city took away 4 lanes on 1st ave (bus, bike, median, parking/turning) and narrowed side streets to 1. All of this doesn’t work, with that kind of volume.
2) the medians are a waste of space. No one ever planted the weed beds anyway. As a result the median, turning lane, and bike lanes are abused - Pedestrians jog in them, dart across them unpredictably to jaywalk or feed a meter, jump off them to hail a rideshare. cyclists use them as 2-way raceways and curb jump to get to bike docks. And drivers can no longer see what is happening as they move into a turning lane, usually now from the middle of the avenue (instead of gradually moving over as when there used to be more lanes and better visibility).
5
And those tandem buses do not clear the intersection while stopped at red lights!
2
@Aubrey: EXACTLY! Thank you for saying it so clearly.
2
"State and federal officials reached a deal to reopen the Statue of Liberty, a day after the federal government shutdown forced it to close."
A very good idea. For tourists who come to New York City in order to see this incomparable symbol of our country, closing it would have been "sad."
As for other parks remaining open, as Trump and the GOP had initially indicated:
Fake news.
But I thought it was smart, from a public-relations standpoint. After all, federal employees would receive back pay anyway, and in terms of both the billions that would be wasted and the Republicans' desire to show concern for the ordinary man, keeping things open made sense. But that was fake news too.
While I knew that the Statue of Liberty was to be closed over the weekend, it was unclear from news reports that other parks also would be. I can assure everyone that the Duchess County parks, at any rate, were closed, including the FDR home and library. That is, all the federal parks were closed. Period.
1
It seems that the majority of bicyclists are elitist yuppies. While pretending to "think green", they do not obey the rules of the road, are inconsiderate of pedestrians, and order groceries from a service that drives huge trucks into the city from New Jersey, spewing pollution, adding to our already congested streets, and dropping off tons of "packaging".
Forget wasting tax dollars on bike lanes. Bike riders should be required to register their bikes and get a license (with written and road tests) to operate one in NYC. Then maybe some of that revenue could be use to improve the safety of our streets for ALL OF US!
7
A couple of questions...
Have you ever ordered delivery before?
Also, how does allegedly "not obeying the rules of the road" cancel out the existent carbon footprint of cycling?
Is there any data to correlate your claim that those who ride bikes also order groceries from New Jersey?
Are you aware that cyclists can, without registration or licenses, be ticketed for not obeying the rules of the road?
6
@Orville: Have YOU ever ordered delivery before? Because a lot of those bike delivery people are riding bikes with engines - not exactly a carbon-footprint-free way to get around.
And are you aware that cyclists are almost NEVER ticketed for not obeying the rules of the road? Why? Because they are smug in their anonymity - they have no license plate, nothing to identify them - and they speed off like the law-breakers they are, not answerable to anyone. That is the reality.
3
Cyclists are ticketed in NYC at a rate that's higher than motorists.
I am all for bike lanes as long as they are actually thoughtfully placed. The city has actually gotten better at this. But there needs to be some give back from the cyclist for their use of street space. Portland has fee when you buy a bike, we should have some kind of registration or at least an identifying number that can be spotted by camera. I know bikers will be annoyed by that, but they have there collected bad behavior to blame, for as many poor drivers as we have I see a greater percentage of riders flouting the law and endangering people. The argument that bikes don't kill people is untrue, though it's rare. They do put themselves in lethal danger all the time. The short is motorists subsidize the streets and public transportation, if you want part of the street cough up the cash and be responsible.
5
It is preposterous to add more lanes without forcing the bicyclists to start following the rules of the road. I am frequently walking with a baby carriage and could not possibly count the number of times my baby and I have been cut off when walking in a crosswalk, with the light. They are a terror. Watching the bicyclists continually run red lights and not stop at stop signs is a disgrace. The solution is easy enough. In addition to adding policing, make the bikes have tags that can be scanned by cameras and issue them tickets!
9
You and your baby would be much safer with more bike lanes and fewer motorized vehicles. Would you rather be hit by a bike or a car?
8
I can't tell you how many people I encounter pushing baby carriages across the street, against the light. Is your child's life or your own worth that extra minute you saved by not waiting for the light to turn green? If cyclist have to obey the law, then so do pedestrians.
2
@Nancy: And I can't tell you how many pedestrians pushing baby carriages are incredibly careful & respect all lights, b/c they are trying to protect the baby.
I don't know how many crazy moms/dads/nannies you encounter, but the main fault I see is with the bike riders who are consistently & persistently breaking the rules. The fault is not with the parents, nor with any other pedestrians on the streets of this city!
There have been babies in baby carriages for hundreds of years before there were bike riders careening recklessly all over Manhattan. You don't often hear that a car or truck hits a baby carriage, do you? Think about why that's the case!
3
i live on 28th street. I knew Dan Hanegby, who was brutally killed by a wayward bus on 26th driving illegally. further, i watched as the NYPD created an initial report that was belied by video footage found days later.
these crosstown lanes are necessary, and vital for the health of myself and my children in the neighborhood. 3 generations of my family live on the west side, none of us with cars. my parents walk every day in the west village. my son skateboards to school every day. i ride my bike every day to meetings. now imagine replacing all of that with cars: more pollution, less space, more traffic. What makes our city great is everything that isn't a private vehicle--the subways, the bike lanes, the sidewalks. it's time to ban private cars below 59th street to Make New York Great Again.
17
Because we grew up with it, having our streets full of dangerous pollution-spewing vehicles, with both sides of every street used for car storage seems normal.
Actually, it makes no sense, especially in Manhattan, where 85% of residents do not own a car, the distances are relatively short, and the streets are there are few hills. It also makes sense in "transit deserts" at the edges of Queens and Brooklyn where, if it only were safe, people could ride bicycles for errands and, if they did not want to ride all the way to work, to reach subways.
As a new generation grows up living with the common sense solution of protected safe bike lanes recovers space wasted for car storage, more people will feel comfortable riding, direction rules should be enforced, transit will become less crowded, and car clogged streets will seem less and less "normal".
22
the bike lanes are not being used by the bike riders. Cars equal commerce. People buy the cars. use the cars to go shopping and they go to places where bikes are not practical. Simply put there ae no easy fixes. Bikes do not do well in bad weather and ae not useful for many people.
3
True. But for those of us in the outer boroughs, who need to drive to a supermarket, cars are still important tools. Unless you foresee an era in which streets are clogged with Fresh Direct and Amazon trucks making stops, delivering, and holding up traffic for a half a block. Of course, at some point we might have drones delivering packages onto rooftops. Then we'll need to get onto the rooftops.
When the "new generation" grows older, it will find that a car, at least in the outer boroughs, will help them remain independent.
Congestion pricing is a good thing. Let's not throw out the baby with . . . .
2
Great insights and recommendations, but there goes the New Years diet.
I've lasted until beginning of February in some years, but may not this year.
“He lets his guests choose many of the plates: 'I’m really interested in the item in the menu that’s written in a way that it sings out to people.' "
Tune of DO YOU HEAR THE PEOPLE SING
Do you hear the menu sing?
Singing a song for hungry guests?
Restaurant Week, we eat so much,
We pop the buttons on our vests.
Lunch still burns here in my heart
That’s why I’m reaching for the Tums
So I will opt for a la carte
When my dinner comes!
Do you hear the small ka-ching?
I hear the tofu is a must.
We know the standards never waver
As we’re savoring the crust.
Enjoy the butter in the tarts
As we are saving princely sums
We feel the flutter of our hearts
When our dinner comes!
9
I love New York Today. I read it this morning, before leaving for work, and there was a different writer's name listed. Also, there were some other differences, including a link to the front-page of the Times, which I liked. Was I seeing things?
I received mine about 7:30 (ET) and the author was/is Jonathan Wolfe, who writes every second week. Same as always.
Sometimes, I find restaurant reviews to be biased in either direction. Keep in mind that there are critics who are known to hate just about anything as well as those who like just about anything. Personally, I don't go to a restaurant solely based on its reviews just like how I go see a movie. As for the protected bike lanes, I feel that they shouldn't have any others at this time considering that many of them go unused most of the time. Not only are they being seen as a waste of money and space, but they tend create traffic in areas where they weren't that common before. Then again, that's probably how they can promote congestion pricing just by creating the very congestion hence the Bloomberg Way.
5
I hate the bike lanes because most bikers simply do not believe that any rules or regulations apply to them. It's terrifying to me to cross an avenue knowing that if there's a bike lane, I need to look THREE times: first one way, then the other way, then back again the first way (just in case some silent speeder has appeared in the meantime).
Biking in NYC is dangerous, inherently so, and before there were bike lanes that was understood. Bike lanes enable careless behavior toward pedestrians, and I am honestly terrified that I will be maimed or killed by a careless bike rider.
Other than the safety of pedestrians (which should be paramount!), I question how safe the bike riders are; I see so many who are NOT wearing a helmet, who are NOT obeying any traffic laws - and so many of them are on their phones as they ride. If they were driving a motor vehicle, they could be ticketed and/or lose their license for these infractions. As it is, there's no real effort at any enforcement that I can see. Occasionally I'll see a police officer with a high-visibility vest standing at a crosswalk (such as at 14th St. and 8th Ave.), presumably "monitoring" bike riders, but the officers are so clearly visible from a distance that OF COURSE the bike riders have plenty of warning to "behave" for one minute, until they're safely past the officer.
The fact that so many bike riders are resistant to following the rules as well as to the idea of being licensed/insured, tells me a lot!
16
your terror about bikes is sadly misplaced. the data is clear: you are endangered by cars, not bikes. it's not about your "feelings", it's about who ends up in emergency rooms and the morgue. and those are people who are hit by cars and trucks, not bikes. My young children and elderly parents are daily threatened by cars and trucks, either of which could kill them. bikes based on the actual evidence and data simply will not.
helmets, by the way, are not worn in every major bike city on earth. they do not provide enough safety to overcome the fact that with mandatory helmet laws come less cyclists, and less cycling means less perceived safety.
11
@Robert Green: Please do not condescend to tell me what I should or should not be terrified of! It certainly IS about my feelings: whether I feel it's safe for me, as a senior citizen, to be out & about in a city full of 20-somethings who go fast and obey no rules. And you will find that my sentiment is shared by pretty much everyone who is a senior citizen. As to your contention that bikes don't kill anyone, tell that to the family of the woman who was knocked over by a bike in Central Park and died as a direct result.
The helmet argument you present is very weak indeed, but DOES support my statement that bike riders don't care about the rules.
BTW, when you are a senior citizen, maybe you'll have enough life experience to understand the "feelings" that you so mock in me and others.
3
I wonder how many senior citizens will be killed by drivers in NYC today? Your example of 1 person killed by a someone on a bike is from 2014, with zero fatalities of people struck by bicycle citywide in 2015 or 2016. Zero! How great is that?! I recommend doing what you can to live your life with less terror. Maybe ride a citi bike in a park on a nice day?
1
Nothing will ruin a star chefs day like screwing up a simple roasted chicken. Especially since I consider this easy to mess up dish the one thing that I order when I’m reviewing a restaurant. The review will always be truthful.
“Masterful preparations except for the roasted chicken which took on the character of a rubber punching bag from resting in the sous vide bath for too long before roasting”
2
I used to write Restaurant reviews for a national magazine. Unfortunately, here in NJ it got me fired from my job. There is only so much honesty that a magazine can dish out. The advertisers tend to frown upon a one and one half star review when they are supporting (indirectly) the reviewers salary.
Remember who is signing the checks before being honest in a review.
1
Adding more protected bike lanes makes everyone - cyclists, drivers and pedestrians - safer. They generally don't reduce the number of parking spaces on a street, but they *do* reduce the number of speeding cars.
And as far as enforcement, yes please start ticketing cyclists more for running red lights and for reckless behavior. Just also ticket more cars for running red lights, speeding, parking in bike lanes, "buzzing" cyclists by driving within 1ft of them, etc.
20
I'd like to see more protected lanes. In the 1970s, I used to ride to Manhattan from an outer borough. Although there were a couple of times when my wheels slipped on greasy streets I usually felt safe. My bike was stolen in college and I've never owned one since then. I was looking forward to riding again with the renewed interest in cycling but have been too afraid. I spoke to the owner of a bike shop who agreed with me that the streets have become more dangerous for cyclists. Cars are a problem, but so are other cyclists.
9
But what about comments that are actually a review of reviews? (I kid, I kid). :-)
3
More! Please, more lanes! Always!
I would definitely bike to work but for the crosstown aspect. It's simply too dangerous to get across town in midtown today. Crossing father uptown doesn't work because the area around the UN interrupts bike lanes, and crossing further south in the 20s is an exercise in lunacy after the terrible accidents that have happened over the past couple years.
I'm pleased to see this issue being addressed and the new lanes can't come soon enough.
Any chance we can get some of these in the 40's? That would be ideal!
20
Max: DOT is planning for lanes on 52nd and 55th. the 40s are a tough target right now though they want to do something for Times Square (what they haven't decided yet.) the 50s lanes should be done in 2020.
4
Regarding bike lanes....
I do not know how to drive. I primarily walk and use the bus and subway, and occasionally cabs.
Sorry but at this point have no faith in NYC cyclists and am against bike lane expansion.
Nearly daily observe cyclists endangering pedestrians - running red lights, going wrong way on streets. It is not the exploited and hardworking delivery people - it is the "regular" cyclists. Cyclists also endanger vehicle traffic - cycling in front of vehicles which then swerve or stop short.
Bike lanes slow buses. Bike lanes also make it difficult for elderly and disabled to access Access-a-Ride and taxis.
BTW pedicabs also a pedestrian and traffic danger
22
Although I support more bike lanes, I share your fear as a pedestrian, having had many close calls. I would like to see more cyclists ticketed.
12
I'm glad you mentioned the pedicabs! I'm a NY native currently living in NJ but come to the city frequently for freelance work assignments. One day I was schlepping my computer bag, another heavy bag with books, and I was just exhausted trying to get to the subway which was still quite a few blocks away. It was rush hour and there wasn't an available cab in sight. A pedicab driver asked if I wanted a lift, so I thought, okay, I'll look like a tourist, but why not for once, at least I won't have to carry all this stuff and can sit down. OMG, I have never been so terrified in my life! This guy thought it would fun to see how close to cars he can get while weaving in and out of lanes. It is a miracle we didn't hit another car or pedestrian. Gah!
5
I think people should listen to LS. The bizarre situation on Amsterdam, for example, makes it difficult for those of us who need to take cabs to hail them. The in the works congestion pricing plan also neglects the needs of the disabled and the elderly. Access-a-Ride? Are you kidding? It is truly unreliable.
LS says he or she mostly takes mass transit, but some of us just can't. Access to subways is not available and people with disabilities, even if they can get down the stairs, can't stand on crowded subway platforms for more than a few minutes. The buses here on the West Side of Manhattan are so overcrowded that they can barely function.
And you city planners think the answer lies in taxing cars? Prove to me that you can improve public transportation and I will approve of your congestion pricing plan. Right now, it scares me.
4
I’m totally in favor if bike lanes in some areas but think they are totally unrealistic in others (like some of the Bronx streets I drive in). Their sole effect seems to be to reduce the number of car lanes and contribute to congestion. I think fewer bike lanes that are more strategically located would be better (or just totally dedicated foot and bike paths like we ride on on helsinki (sigh...)
4
As a NON-New Yorker!!! i have seen bike lanes in other cites, not as large as New York, and agree they have a place. the lanes make it easier on everyone, IF THE RIDERS WOULD FOLLOW THE RULES!!!!!!!! not stopping at lights can complicate things and make it very dangerous. I have come close to hitting bikes blowing lights an weaving in traffic. As to the loosing of parking spot, is tough on locals, but may be a necessary evil to protect lfe.
12
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!
1
@Tim: Losing a parking spot was NEVER a "necessary evil to protect life" before, and it's not now. That is a fake argument made by bike lane lobbyists.
1
My first laugh of the day! Thanks.
1
The reason I read the NY digest is that more often than not it provides my first laugh of the day. It’s the antidote to all the other depressing news.
1
In regards to Ms Goldfields comment on her current favorite food, the correct spelling is Maypo. As in "I want my Maypo"
Anyone over 60 Years old knows from where I speak. Even Micky liked it.
http://metsmerizedonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Item_19731_1.jpg
Arthur, if you're going to emend spelling, please know what you're talking about. "mapo tofu," Hannah Goldfield's fave, is spelled correctly. It would be most unusual for a food critic to get it wrong.
And speaking of spelling, it's "Mikey," as in "Mikey likes it!" So did MICKEY.
4
actually, she is correct in the name.
my chuckle was that there is a name for this dish. “Mapo tofu” is similar to what I’ve made for years but as a meatless dinner. my daughters called it, spicy tofu. I shred cabbage for bulk, carrots, an onion, lots of garlic and a garnish of scallions. It is delicious on its own or over rice.
I may try the original using a bit of ground pork.
I found this back story of mapo tofu (reminds me of the legend of pasta puttanesca, ladies making the most of ingredients on hand:
http://www.pbs.org/food/fresh-tastes/mapo-tofu/
as Jacques Pepin says, Happy Cooking!
3
Maypo is one thing, mapo tofu, a popular Cinnese (Sichuan) dish, of tofu in a spicy sauce, is quite another.
1
Over the years I've never followed the advise of people who review movies, travel and clothing. Just too subjective.
But for whatever reason I've followed, to a degree, restaurant reviews. If told that a sauce is too sweet, or the potatoes sticky, I've tended to accept that as likely factual. And of course guidance as to the service and facility cleanliness is being given first hand.
IMHO restaurant reviews are very helpful.
3
It's the same with NY Times movie reviews, in my experience.
I know what to expect, am forewarned. I know what the movie is "about", genre etc and how reviewer experienced it. I might agree or disagree in part; but I usually check the review before buying a ticket if I decide I want to see it.
2