I'm in the DC metro area and I have noticed that there are some Restaurants/Chefs/Owners whose establishments seem to get a world of publicity.

In many cases, having read the hype, I try the restaurant and the experience falls short of my expectations. Of course other establishments are able to meet and even exceed my expectations.

I have been amazed at the average food and indifferent service that I have been offered from establishments that are reported to be fantastic! (The Washington Post food critic is very good, I'm referring to other publications, local and national)

Does anyone have comments on restaurants that are built on hype and BS as opposed to those that really deliver a fantastic dining experience?

[Jim]

I think one aspect of your question would be helped with understanding that a lot of the hype is a result of self-promotion. This can be accomplished by issuing press releases, hosting 'spotlight' events at a discount, etc. Which follows that there must be a reason to self-promote, i.e. business isn't great enough to not need advertising. Therefore, you could conclude that those restaurants that are as good as or better than the 'hyped' ones, makes sense. They are good enough and well attended enough to not need to shamlessly self-promote. Did you also ever notice that unless the restaurant is a landmark of some sorts, that the over-hyped restaurants are often the ones that are vacated in a few years?