In general in the US food critics for publications such as the New York Times or New York magazine will not judge a restaurant until they and their minions (in the case of the NYT) go several times, because as one explained to me, “It’s only fair to judge a place on its entire menu, on several days,” whereas many French critics for the biggest circulation media, read Le Figaro or Le Monde, go once to a place and that’s it; as one of the biggest guys explained, “That’s the way you see how the average citizen is fed and treated.”

Now, supposedly, the critics doing the yearly French food-guides may rely on stringers to do the initial cut but they go to the biggies or winners of awards. But as an ex-reviewer for the Michelin Red Guide revealed, some places are visited only once every 5 or 6 years.

Another difference is how soon after places open they are visited; in France, time after time, I hear stories about a restaurant’s first meal being packed entirely with critics, whereas Yankees sometimes wait until a place has “mellowed or matured”; one colleague of mine waits up to nine months.

Finally there’s the sheer number of folks reviewing in Paris versus New York. I figure that with the big daily national papers, weekly magazines, radio stations as well as A Nous Paris and Le Fooding and the bloggers, at least two dozen critics are hitting places, whereas in New York it’s far far fewer. And while the big boys at Figaro/Figaroscope certainly weigh in strongly, the New York Times reviewer has a uniquely powerful voice.
>more