Washington Post recipes

[Anonymous]

I love the NYT cooking app and use it all the time… primarily because of the comments. Real cooks try the recipes and report back on what works and what doesn’t, and aren’t censored when they say don’t bother/a recipe isn’t worth it.

I wish the WaPo would do the same thing with their recipes! I would try more of their recipes if they had reviews!

That’s it. Just here to say that.

[Anonymous]

I’ve used a few and they arent nearly as good as NYT!

[Anonymous]

I think they used to be a lot better, but I rarely bother to try their recipes now.

I agree about the reviews - I've always found feedback from people who have made the recipe to be really helpful and can't imagine why they don't have them.

[Anonymous]

I haven’t been impressed with WaPo’s food section lately. I liked it a lot better when I first started subscribing to the Post almost 2 decades ago, probably before there were other options LOL. NYT seems to have a much better roster of food writers and the recipe comments are the best part.

[Anonymous]

I have the NYTimes app and I do use it, but it can feel as if they throw something complicated and unnecessary into every recipe because that’s sort of the brand. I’m not talking about the big time hits like the chicken or the cookies. But the rest of it.

[Anonymous]

I love the NYTimes app. I mostly just use it as a ratio base…I don’t often follow it specifically. Always check the comments!

[Anonymous]

It was the tomato tart with a cheddar/parm/pepper crust that intrigued me most recently in the WaPo and I would have tried it if I’d read a couple reviews.

Joe Yonan is ok if you’re a veggie, but beyond that it’s pretty bad esp in comparison to the NYT

[Anonymous]

I’ve really enjoyed a lot of recipes in the Washington Post in the last few years (the baked potato soup recipe has been worth its weight in snuggly winter dinners) and I no longer have access to the NYT recipes, but I kind of agree. I plan on trying the sheet pan romesco-inspired dish soon. It’s veggie forward and simple and there’s at least a chance my kids will eat parts of the meal.

[Anonymous]

Except for the NYT reviewers in every recipe who change 20 things about the recipe/make it gluten-free and then review it. Um, that is not helpful, people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except for the NYT reviewers in every recipe who change 20 things about the recipe/make it gluten-free and then review it. Um, that is not helpful, people.

Yeah, I usually look at the 'most helpful' section of the comments.

[Anonymous]

Dave Hagerdon’s German potato salad is a regular fixture at our dinner table. Otherwise I prefer NYT.

[Anonymous]

I feel the same way about the lack of reviews. I’ve tried too many intriguing looking Washington Post recipes that just don’t quite work. To the commenter complaining about the complexity of the New York Times recipes, at least the complexity is obvious and the reviews will tell you whether all that work was worth it. Often in New York Times recipes even if there’s a problem with the recipe many reviewers will indicate the recipe is imperfect, but with a certain tweak it’s very good. Then you know you’ve got a good recipe, as modified. It’s frustrating, because a lot of the Washington
Post recipes look good, but I just can’t rely on them without reviews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve really enjoyed a lot of recipes in the Washington Post in the last few years (the baked potato soup recipe has been worth its weight in snuggly winter dinners) and I no longer have access to the NYT recipes, but I kind of agree. I plan on trying the sheet pan romesco-inspired dish soon. It’s veggie forward and simple and there’s at least a chance my kids will eat parts of the meal.

I had to check the date to see if I wrote this. I did not. But that potato soup from Wapo is amazing. Haven’t tried the sheet pan romesco though.

[Anonymous]

The WaPo in general has terrible comments—I think they’d don’t have staff to police it, or have made a policy choice not to, so it’s mostly crazy people posting. The NYTimes seems to have dedicated staff to curate comments so the comments are often very insightful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except for the NYT reviewers in every recipe who change 20 things about the recipe/make it gluten-free and then review it. Um, that is not helpful, people.

I think it IS helpful, but I kinda hate NYT recipes because if you don't look at the top comments and do those tweaks the recipes on their face are often crap. Why can't the food writers try and test their recipes so they don't require a million tweaks to make them palatable?