Cooks Illustrated vs. The Internet
Christopher Kimball, founder and editor or Cooks Illustrated, defends his dismissal of recipes and cooking advice found on the Internet:
In terms of recipes, no, I do not believe in a Wiki website, with a community opining on recipes as a means of creating a valuable database. Making a recipe 75 times in a test kitchen under controlled circumstances (yes, this is deeply self-serving) is vastly better than the voices of millions under less the ideal circumstances, with kitchens with a host of different problems/equipment/etc.Cooks Illustrated is the finest magazine I know. It’s ad-free, well written, useful, and beautifully designed. Put it next to your typical cooking or lifestyle magazine and they seem like they’re from different worlds.
It’s easy to dismiss Kimball back, painting him as a technophobic curmudgeon. But keep in mind, Cooks has an excellent website as well, and Mr. Kimball’s Twitter feed paints him as a funny, warm, and knowledgeable dude.
We need trusted editors, and we need people with strong opinions. For me, what stands out about Cooks is that they’re committed to challenging their own subjective tastes. Their authority derives from repeat performance and comparative taste tests. Their recipes are not lists of instructions; they’re stories that tell the whole process, from the idea to the finished dish.
It’s true, the Cooks Illustrated books I received a few years ago have some of the best recipes I’ve ever followed, including basics like mashed potatoes, pork chops, and grilled salmon. They try numerous variations on a theme, heats, cooking surfaces, and more until they get it right, then walk you through the last recipe standing. Worth it.
Source: mrgan
