S5 E75 MICHELIN Guide Florida 2026: Hot Takes, Hard Truths, and a Few Receipts

The 2026 MICHELIN Guide Florida results have arrived, and as expected, the reactions were immediate.

In this episode, I break down the winners, the surprises, and the predictions that came true. From Emelina and Mutra earning their first stars to notable Bib Gourmand additions and some glaring omissions, we'll dive deep into what the results mean for Florida's evolving dining scene.

But this episode goes far beyond the list itself.

I tackle the increasingly heated debate surrounding Cuban culinary identity, the ongoing arguments about who deserves credit for shaping the future of Cuban-influenced fine dining, and why I believe the entire conversation has drifted away from what actually matters: the food.

We'll also address some of the biggest misconceptions surrounding MICHELIN. This includes accusations of pay-to-play, inspector qualifications, and why criticism is healthy, but only when it's rooted in experience, curiosity, and a genuine desire to understand.

Finally, we zoom out to discuss something even bigger than MICHELIN: the state of Miami food media, who gets to shape the narrative of a city, and why preserving the story of Florida's culinary growth matters now more than ever.

Whether you love the guide, hate the guide, or simply enjoy following the conversation, this is one of the most important discussions I've had all year.

Grab a glass of wine. Sit back. Listen in. 

From my "palette" to yours. 

Cheers!

Brenda

thewhetpalette.com

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:00

Welcome to the Wet Palette Podcast. I am Brenda Fernandez Popritkin. On today's episode of the Wet Palette Podcast, I'm unpacking the 2026 Michelin Guide Florida selections. And trust me, I have thoughts. We'll talk about the winners, the surprises, and the predictions that came true. We'll also dive into some of the conversations that emerged almost immediately after the announcement, including one debate I think has become far more about semantics than substance. Then we'll tackle a few listener questions, address some of the biggest misconceptions surrounding the Michelin guide, and discuss why criticism is important, but only when it's rooted in experience, curiosity, and a genuine desire to understand. And finally, we are going to zoom out and talk about something much bigger than Michelin. Food media, Miami food media. Who gets to shape a narrative and why preserving the story of our emerging dining city matters more than ever? Or yourself something good. Let's get into it. If you've followed my coverage for any length of time, you know this is one of my favorite days of the year. Not because I think Michelin is perfect. In fact, quite the opposite. Some of the most spirited conversations I've had on this podcast over the years have involved questioning the guide, questioning consistency, questioning standards, and trying to understand how inspectors view Florida's rapidly evolving dining scene. But regardless of where you land on Michelin, this remains one of the most exciting days in hospitality. The emotion is real, the impact is real. And anyone who followed the reveal aftermath and saw the team celebrating, hugging, and crying and taking in their hard work, being recognized knows exactly what I am talking about. Before we get into some of the trauma, let's talk about the actual results. The guide now includes 200 selections across Florida, two two-star restaurants, 24 one-star restaurants, five green stars, 45 baby gourmands, 129 recommended restaurants. This was also the first statewide Florida guide and the first digital format reveal. Was it the same as being in the room? No. But did it preserve some of the excitement and prestige of the reveal? I think it absolutely did within reason. I was able to still feel excited about it, but definitely a little lonelier, not able, not being able to celebrate and cheer with um the winners. So let's talk about what everyone wants to talk about, the new stars. And I have to tell you, I could not be happier. Fans of this podcast should not be surprised in the slightest, not even a little. Let's start with Emmelina. I've been talking about this restaurant for a long time. In fact, I broke the news on it on it on my blog of the opening of the early look of what was ahead. And from the beginning, I felt there was something special happening there. Everything felt incredibly dialed in from the first opening week. And here's where I'm going to go on record. I don't just think Emelina deserved one star. I think if they continue on this trajectory, two stars is absolutely within reach. And yes, I said it. The team is operating at a level that deserves serious attention. Being Cuban, there's also something personally meaningful about watching the team engage with Cuban influence, not just at Amelina, but just in general of anyone attempting and successfully elevating Cuban cuisine. I'll spend much more time talking about it later in detail because apparently the internet has decided to turn Cuban identity into a competitive sport this last week and a half. But for now, let's simply acknowledge the obvious. The food is exceptional, the execution is impeccable, and the recognition was earned. And then we have mudra. If you listen to my recent episodes, you already know how I feel about this one as well. Because I dined at mudra after recording my original predictions episode. I actually went back and added an additional segment specifically because I felt so strongly about mudra and I needed to talk about it. I called it one of the most exciting restaurants I had encountered in years. I said I was obsessed with it. I said there was nothing quite like it. And I went as far as saying that if there was ever a shoe-in for a Michelin Star, this was it. Those were my words before the announcement. So needless to say, it is very, very exciting. Um the restaurant's unexpected, it's quirky, it's fun, but most importantly, it's delicious. Every time I visit, I leave thinking about the creativity coming out of that kitchen. And this was another one where I saw it, and thankfully the inspectors saw it too. Of all the possible outcomes for new stars this year, I honestly could not have scripted a better pair of winners. Emmelina and Moutra. Now let's talk about Bib Gourmands because there were a couple of moves that make me made me generally happy about that. First, TBD. This was a correct move, period. The team is young, they're hungry, they're ambitious, and they're doing exactly the kind of work um Bib Gourmand was designed to recognize. The other move that really stood out to me was Gotua. If you follow my writing, you already know I have a soft spot for Gotua. Chef Alejandra and her team are doing a beautiful um job. Not loud, not flashy, just beautiful work, thoughtful work, the kind of food that feels rooted in culture, memory, and hospitality. And watching Kotua move from recommended to Big Roman felt incredibly earned. And what made it even more special was seeing the Michelin guy take a moment during the broadcast to specifically highlight that progression. And that mattered because it wasn't just an addition that we could have just found by research after. It was acknowledgement of growth. They took a moment to acknowledge that, um, that the restaurant has continued evolving. And um, I love that. Another interesting development was the green star category because let's be honest, there has been plenty of speculation surrounding the green stars lately, and Michelin themselves just named that there's a new um category that they're bringing in and that they're just continuing it. But yeah, here we are. It was given to a farm in Tampa, and all the other Florida restaurants retain their green stars. It's listed on the website. Go check it out for yourself. One thing that did surprise me was the absence of the special awards from the live stream itself. However, the Best Samalier Award went to Juan Valencia of Omo in Orlando. And if you've listened to this podcast, again, you know exactly why that caught my attention. I have been saying for a while now that Omo feels like a restaurant operating above its current classification of one star. I've said repeatedly that Omo has legitimate two-star potential as well. So this award doesn't prove that prediction, of course, but it certainly doesn't hurt the argument. Then we get to Bistro Ocho. Mmm, now this one was not on my bingo card, not even for a second. And I'm going to be transparent here. I am not a fan of Shawa Hospitality, that's the group that owns it. I'm probably not the right person to evaluate that selection because of a previous situation involving Hidden, who is also connected to that hospitality group, that left a bad taste in my mouth. Even now, 10 years later, as a result, Bistro Ocho has remained on my personal list of places I haven't prioritized and I don't feel like going to. So for this one, I'm turning over to you, and you're gonna have to tell me what I'm missing, if there's anything that I am missing. Um, the selection genuinely surprised me. Overall, though, when I step back and look at the results of the Michelin Guide Florida, my reaction is overwhelmingly positive. Not giving stars away like confetti, like some haters like to say. Um, were the restaurants I would still love to see recognized? Of course, absolutely. I see the guide, I see a guide that got several very important things right this year, but there were some serious omissions. Of course, would it be a ceremony without some omissions? The biggest one in Miami, I think, being the Recog Weco. I know the team is young and they still have a lot of fight in them, but that would have been well deserved. I cannot stress the intense focus that they have, how well planned and executed as those dishes are, when every bite needs a moment to process. That was a big miss. Maybe it's timing, maybe it's inspection frequency or lack thereof. Maybe there's another factor entirely. I don't think it's it proves a grand conspiracy. Sometimes the answer is simply that large systems move slowly. Then you have the deserving ones that we have all been asking for for years. You have Cogin, you have Zitsum. They have been and they have been on the recognized and bib category section, but can certainly move on out of there like Gotoa did. In For Lauderdale, same for Caruso in Forlauderdale, um, Pier 66, you have Evelyn's, you have the Catherine. I've discussed how tough hotel concepts seemed to be for Michelin on my last episode. But here we are. To me, it felt like an unfinished project by the guide. Taking on all of Florida was ambitious from day one. I like the results, but I feel it was almost like turning in a project before it was fully complete. Out of time, maybe out of funds, more on that later, and maybe out of personnel, more on that later as well. Before continuing, I need to pause and return to the Cuban fine dining topic, where Emilina was discussed alongside Ariette, one that has much consumed, uh has consumed entirely too much oxygen this week. Somewhere along the way, people began confusing marketing language with historical reality. Apparently, if you don't use the phrases elevating Cuban cuisine, reimagining Cuban cuisine, and the future of Cuban cuisine in your marketing materials, then your contribution somehow doesn't count. And that is absurd. Okay? Who did Cuban find dining first? When a national publication talks about Emmelina and casually says that they executed the concept first, we ignore them. But when a Florida publication says it, then it's war. And I get it. The conversation absolutely spiraled the last couple of weeks. Emmelina, Ariette, Cuban identity, who deserves credit for what? And as a Cuban-born diner, this topic is actually very close to my heart, which is exactly why I find so much of this discussion completely exhausting, me tienen hasta l'ultimo pelo. Okay? Not because it isn't worth discussing, history, accuracy, and documentation is absolutely worth discussing. But what is not worth respecting is manufactured arguments built on a flawed premise that resembles more branding than heart. And my biggest takeaway after reading all of these opinions is that everyone seems to be arguing the wrong question. As I said, the question isn't whether Arriette did it first. The question isn't whether Emmelina did it first. The question isn't where one chef is more Cuban than the other. The question isn't whether someone born in Cuba is somehow more qualified than someone who was born in Miami. The question isn't whether Michelin categorized one restaurant as Cuban as the other and the other as New American. Okay. The question isn't who gets ownership of the narrative. None of those things get to the heart of what these chefs are actually doing, and actually it takes away from it. The only question that should matter is whether the food succeeds in telling their story and in their own way. They both are. That's something that we need to celebrate. But let's take it a step further and examine this. Okay. Neither Emelina or Ariette is serving Cuban food. Period. End of story. When most people think of Cuban food, they're thinking about dishes that many of us grew up with, right? Eating. You have pan con vite, you have arroz, frijoles, maduros, tostones, vaca frita, arroz con pollo, all the things. Traditional Cuban food. That's not what neither one of these restaurants is serving. What both restaurants are doing is something much more interesting. They're exploring the idea of what Cuban cuisine could have become had its culinary evolution been allowed to continue uninterrupted. That is a completely different exercise. But let's talk about identity for a second, because apparently everyone has become an expert on who gets to be Cuban. I've seen arguments suggesting that being Cuban-born somehow makes one person more qualified to another to interpret Cuban influences. I've seen people imply that someone born in Miami is somehow less connected to their heritage. Who gets to decide that? Who are we to decide that? Who gets to determine how passionately someone connects with their heritage? Who gets to measure cultural authenticity? Okay, and if anything, I was born in Cuba. Does that mean I'm older than most of you? So does that mean that I own it more than all of you? Those are very dangerous roads to travel. And once you start assigning legitimacy based solely on birthplace, the conversation quickly stops being about food and starts becoming something else entirely. And I have very little interest in that game, in that game. Another argument I've seen repeatedly is that Michelin categorizes these restaurants differently. And therefore, that somehow settles the delay. No, it doesn't. Let's take Los Felix as an example. Michelin Guide lists Los Felix as a categorizes them as a Mexican restaurant. The restaurant itself identifies itself as a broader Mesoamerican perspective with a Mesoamerican perspective. And the chef is Colombian. Pause for drama. How is that a reminder that labels are often imperfect? Michelin's categories are organizational tools. They're not the almighty gods of food category assignments. Okay. And let's talk about Ariette, because one thing that has been driving me crazy is the surrounding bias surrounding this conversation. Michael Belchan, Chef Michael Belchan, has been exploring these ideas for years. He wasn't waiting for social media 10 years ago to invent a narrative. Years, not months, not since this became a trendy topic. Ariette opened in 2016. For those keeping score at home, that was a decade ago. The Cuban influences didn't subtly appear in 2025. One of the restaurants' most iconic dishes has been that has been long on the menu is the foie gras paired with the blatanos and tentacion. And yes, excuse French, as does Emelina's techniques. And again, both are deserving of their own interpretation of the same concept. I'm just highlighting each argument point here so that we can dissect this a little more. If that isn't an example of reimagining Cuban influences through the lens of fine dining, then I am not sure what is. And if we're going to determine culinary history based on whom marketed an idea most effectively, then we're no longer discussing history. We're discussing branding. And branding is not history. History is the work, the food, and what's actually happening on a plate. Now, does that diminish what Emmelina is doing? Absolutely not. And it wasn't the restaurant, by the way. Um, as usual, it's just the media. I am ecstatic to see Emmelina receive a star, as I said earlier. But celebrating Emmelina does not require rewriting history. The work simply existed. If we're going to have these conversations, we should at least know the timeline. And perhaps that's part of why history matters. It's not the whole story we should be focusing on, but if we're going to play, let's play so that we can all move on. I will continue. Here's a dose of history. This clip I am about to play is from 2022. Okay. 2022. 22. When the guest of the then Bancon podcast, which was owned by um Chef Michael Baltran, um, there started discussing Ariette and what it means, a new American. And again, for those who didn't catch it, 2022. Please hold.

SPEAKER_00 15:34

I think the interesting moment is me saying it's a new American restaurant because it's not. Of course. The day that I decided that I was gonna like shed all the insecurities of who I was and where food should be, and what the food I really want to cook is the day that this restaurant changed forever. And it's the day that I said that like I want there to be another kid from Cuban descent to say like there was a dude doing Cuban food that was different, and something that they thought, like, if our country wasn't where it is currently and where it's been for the last six years, maybe the food would be like this. You know, today where I'm at is like I just want to have an impact for another generation of people of cooks like me that may be a little bit lost. Who are we? What kind of food do we do? Is it wrong to change it? Is it wrong to like turn on its head and say, like, fuck that? I know that's the way it was supposed to be, and that's the way that people do it. Is it wrong to change that? It's not wrong to change that because that's what you believe in. And for me, I feel like that's been the entire journey. You know what I mean? I was in New York last week and I was a bunch with a bunch of like uh Michelin brass people, right? Like great people, super inviting. Um I think like very wholehearted people. Just like really care really care about good food, right? And I said, you know, like I think I'm the first chef from Cuban American descent to like want to start. Yeah. And they were like, you know what? I think you're right. And I'm like, yeah, I'm I'm pretty sure that I'm right. It resonates to me, but it doesn't resonate to a bunch of other people because we're just like a small blip. Like we're just in the Caribbean small thing, but it it digs so deep to me because there's a whole generation of humans that sacrificed their entire life to give me this opportunity. So if I can if I can just guide people couple cats, it doesn't matter to have their own expression in the future, then I've done my job.

SPEAKER_01 18:01

Okay, I think he did just that. But wait, there's more. If we truly want to talk about timelines, then the conversation becomes even more complicated. Because while everyone is busy arguing about who first used a certain phrase or who first marketed a certain concept, I have been researching the work of Cuban board chef Alberto Gonzalez. Albertico. Do you know him? No. He has publicly stated that while leading a kitchen at Restaurant Sauro in Italy, the restaurant held a Michelin star from 2007 through 2009, and that he incorporated Cuban influences into his cooking during that period to elevate Cuban cuisine. I'm still gathering documentation on that. I've reached out to him for a comment. I have not heard back yet. It's true. Um, if it's true, then well, he didn't launch a movement or build an identity campaign around it. He didn't spend days arguing online about who got there first. He just cooked as a Cuban born at a Michelin starred level. So now what? Does that not count? Because it's not 2026. Does it only count if it's marketed a certain way? Does it only count if you know people if we know if people write articles about it calling him out, calling being first? Does it only count if Instagram approves? If someone wasn't already doing the work but wasn't advert if someone was already doing the work but wasn't advertising it using the language we prefer today, does their contribution suddenly disappear? Give me a break. The more I think about this conversation, the more ridiculous it becomes. The truth is that I love what both restaurants are doing. I think both chefs are contributing something meaningful to Florida's culinary story. I think both deserve recognition. What matters isn't one how one restaurant gets from point A to point B compared to the other. What matters is that they're moving the conversation forward. That Cuban influences are being discussed at the highest levels of dining. Okay, back to the main Michelin topic. Uh while I was celebrating these results and cheering for chefs who absolutely deserve their moment, unfortunately, the internet strikes again and something else was happening. Um, it wasn't nearly as inspiring. Um, let's take a moment to address the Miami Michelin haters. You know who you are. Every single year, right around Michelin season, the same whining begins. The guide is overrated, the inspectors are clueless, stars are meaningless, local personalities know better. None of it matters anymore. The chefs panic, restaurants brace themselves, social media becomes one giant prediction thread, entire identities online become built around Terry Donna's system they claim nobody should care about anymore. Ooh. That's a lot of yapping for something that doesn't matter anymore. If it didn't matter, nobody would be talking about it. Contradiction alone says everything. Now let me be crystal clear. Michelin is not perfect, none of the award systems are. They all follow different protocols. I have said this repeatedly throughout my own coverage. I have openly questioned inconsistencies, I have discussed conservative promotion patterns, regional discrepancies, timing issues, and the reality that Florida's dining ecosystem is still evolving in real time. In fact, if you listen to my Predicts episode before this ceremony, I literally said I use the Michelin guide as just that, a guide, and so should you. I said that for years. I enjoy the journey, even when I disagree with the guide. That's perfectly fine. Using Michelin as a guide is very different from treating Michelin as religion. But there is a massive difference between critically analyzing the guide for years based on first hand dining experience and simply throwing rocks at it from the sidelines because outrage generates clicks. Again, you know who you are. And because you have visited a restaurant once that had a star and didn't have a good experience, or it was too expensive, or you feel the local hole in the wall you think is better, or because it's for snobby people only. Oh no, but also you haven't taken the time to do a deep dive on how the logistics and how it all works. Um I get it, that would require actual work, but okay. As usual, I will lead straight um with straight up facts on this next part. One thing that has become painfully obvious doing Michelin discourse is how many people discussing the guide have extremely limited experience dining within the actual global storage ecosystem. Not just one tasty menu in Miami, not one anniversary dinner in New York 10 years ago. Okay, I mean truly dining across cities, countries, cultures, where standards, service, philosophy, um, pacing, technique, and execution operate at entirely different levels and Miami is still working towards, and we strive to be. Once you do that, patterns begin revealing themselves quickly, and you know I am all about finding those patterns. How wildly different one-star experiences can feel internationally. How where is it that Florida excels? Where does Florida still lack some refinement or a lot of refinement? And where the guide absolutely applies uneven pressure depending on geography. And that perspective matters a lot. It is very easy to scream the inspectors are wrong when your entire culinary preference point exists with one local market. It can be said, um, of course, and I have said it, but who is saying it matters. The idea that being loud online somehow outweighs technical evaluation has become one of the strangest developments in modern dining culture. And no, I am sorry to burst your bubble, but the local influencers do not have a better perspective than a trained inspector evaluating a restaurant. I'm gonna let that sit for a second. No. Michelin is not evaluating who trends hardest online, who gets reposted the most often, who has the flashiest reservations, who serves the largest portions. They are evaluating consistency, execution, precision, technique, and ingredient quality. Now, does that framework occasionally miss significant restaurants? Yeah, we've seen it. Absolutely. Can the guide sometimes feel conservative? Absolutely, yes. Can inspectors overlook places deserving of more attention? Absolutely, yes. But pretending that the standards themselves hold no value simply because they do not perfectly align with the lazy analysis of a keyboard warrior or two or three, or someone looking for clickbait content is laughable. Pay to play. People love throwing this phrase around because it sounds scandalous. There's a difference between destinations financially supporting market inclusion for their city and restaurants directly purchasing stars. Those are not remotely the same thing. And the reality is it does help tourism, it does drive people to restaurants and to different destinations. There's an entire section of tourists who specifically travel for food and follow the guide as a starting point. Um, if stars could simply be bought, every luxury tourism market would suddenly be flooded with three-story restaurants overnight. And that has obviously not happened. We are five years in without one, and we shouldn't have one. We're not ready yet. Um, again, I said it a little while ago. They hand out stars like confetti. Meanwhile, Miami got two new stars. The only confetti I see is in the brain of those who say that. That's it. A little sprinkle. In fact, Florida has remained relatively restrained at the upper tiers despite explosive culinary growth. Promotions move slowly as they share. That alone completely undermines the fantasy that stars are casually handed out to whoever writes the largest check. Disagreement with individual outcomes does not invalidate an entire system just because it didn't go the way we wanted it to. And obviously, I have opinions of how I wish it would have gone. It doesn't mean I don't respect it. It simply means dining remains subjective within within a structured framework. Michelin still shapes the industry, whether people like it or not. This is the part critics conveniently avoid acknowledging. Even chefs who publicly claim not to care still understand exactly what stars can influence. You have international credibility, investor confidence, tourism visibility, media attention, staff recruitment, pricing power, long-term positioning, and reservation demand. That influence is real. Despite all the annual outrage cycles, Michelin still remains the most globally recognized dining award system on the planet. Not only the framework, but and not a flat, not the only framework, and not a flawless one, but absolutely the one that continues moving markets at the highest level. And for all its flaws, Michelin still does remarkably well. Um doesn't mean I stop questioning it. It means I question it while I'm while still understanding its value. And whether people want to admit it or not, restaurants still change trajectories overnight because of those stars and because it still matters. At the end of the day, diners have to decide which systems align most closely with their own experiences or not, and move on. Here are some additional questions and comments you sent in on my Instagram story. If a restaurant doesn't carry a certain product, they won't get a star. Let's think this through for a moment. Florida now has 200 selections in the guide. 200. Are we seriously thinking that every one of those restaurants is carrying the exact same sponsored products? Of course not. Who cares what a tire company says? So funny when the guy changing the tires, the one evaluating the restaurants, right? He must work like what, nine to five, and then he goes and dines, and that's the same person who's doing it. The it's just a tire company argument always cracks me up. I don't know. Um, at least Michelin content marketing, um, their content strategy has survived for more than a century. And let's be honest, Michelin may have invented the influencer business model before influencers existed. They created content, they built an audience, they became a trusted source that influenced customer behavior, they drove purchases, and they were doing it in 1900. The rest of us are just adding ring lights and affiliate links. Not me, but I do lights. For what it's worth, here's a job listing to apply to become an inspector. So don't apply all at once. Ready? Here we go. I went ahead and looked at this for you on Google. I know Google is hard. I know, I know it's really hard to look up information, and it's just easier to type or type on your phone and give opinions that are not based on really any knowledge. But let's go through the qualifications of what a Michelin inspector needs in order to be considered. Okay. A bachelor's degree in culinary food studies, hotel management or equivalent degree, 10 years or more of experience in hotel, restaurant, or other relevant industry, attention to detail. None of you have that. Um, strong skills of observation, memory for cuisine, natural sensory talent for tasting and analyzing food. This position requires flexible travel schedule along with regular evening work hours, integrity, discretion and respect for requirement of anonymity, extensive international knowledge of ingredients, culinary techniques, cuisines, and culinary fundamentals, flexibility, and ability to adjust to change easily and adapt to changing work environment, ability to problem solve effectively in unexpected circumstances, ability to work independently, excellent writing skills, solid organizational skills, good interpersonal skills, able to work collaboratively, so good interpersonal skills, able to work collaboratively and remotely, able to communicate effectively and express ideas with clarity, excellent research skills, extensive familiarity with restaurant and food-related media. Okay, something else. You have to maintain anonymity 100% of the time for yourself and for team members. Perform inspection meals, lunch, dinner daily, daily across assigned markets, compose a detailed report of each meal, also including social media content. Organize up to three weeks of monthly travel, including international, to assign markets, including booking, plane, train tickets, hotels, car rentals, and schedule all-meal reservations coordinating with other inspectors when necessary. Monitor a variety of media outlets so they're looking at everything that we're writing, right? Local news blogs, social media, etc., for restaurant openings, closings, chef movement, and all other relevant information, and maintain an up-to-date list of restaurant openings organized by priority within assigned markets. Coordinate with editorial team to proofread and fact-check texts and all other Michelin guide content, responsibly manage all business expenses related to meal and travel expenditures. Right? Just like your everyday influencer. Something else that you asked, why aren't Michelin reviews updated more frequently? And that is a great question. Um, and the answer is probably far less exciting than most people want it to be. The simple answer is probably budget and scale. The Michelin machine has become so large that I don't think it's physically possible to maintain the level of inspection frequency many diners imagine is happening. And okay, this is some basic math. Florida alone now has 200 selections. 200. So if we start factoring in flights, hotel, transportation, multiple inspectors, multiple visits, tasting menus, expense accounts, administrative costs, and every other market Michelin is currently covering around the world, the numbers become staggering very quickly. It's not defending Michelin, okay? It's just a reality, putting it out there. People often imagine inspectors revisiting every restaurant annually, ordering full menus, taking detailed notes, and unpacking um all their thoughts into descriptions and constantly reassessing every selection in real time. And I simply don't believe that's happening. And frankly, I don't think it's physically possible, even with all the supposed millions you all think that the Michelin guide is getting. The guide continues expanding. They're doing this to themselves. The list of destinations continues to grow. The product has largely shifted from physical guidebooks to a digital model. Yet the logistical challenge of inspection remains incredibly resource intensive. At some point, growth itself becomes a challenge. And I think we're seeing some of that evidence, unfortunately, happening to the Michelin guide. And one of the reasons I say this is because Michelin's own website often tells a story if you know what you're looking for. For years I've noticed that restaurant descriptions can reveal roughly when inspectors were last dining in there. The dishes highlighted often serve as clues. Sometimes, if you're if you're familiar with the restaurant menu, it's obvious. You'll see references of dishes that haven't been on the menu in years. Other times you'll see a strange mix of newer dishes alongside references that dates back two or three years, or even from opening week of a restaurant. And if you spend enough time reading the guide, then you start seeing signs that many descriptions are not being rewritten annually. And it doesn't necessarily mean they're not being visited, but it doesn't necessarily mean standards are being reassessed. Um, so before we leave this topic, I want to make one final point, and one that often gets lost in these discussions. Many people don't realize that part of an inspector's job has historically involved paying attention to the local dining landscape, the conversations, media, coverage, emerging talent, maybe even this podcast. What is being discussed? What are diners excited about? In other words, the conversation matters. Not in what is the algorithm favoring type of way, but what has actual potential, which means all of us have a role to play. If you genuinely believe a restaurant deserves recognition, don't just complain about it. Okay? Um write about it, write to Michelin about it, write to Greater Miami about it, post about them, talk about them, document them, explain why. Be specific, be thoughtful, be consistent, make the case for them. And if enough people who care deeply about restaurants continue telling those stories, eventually those stories become impossible to ignore. And that brings me to something I have been thinking about for a very long time. Because while Michelin may have its flaws, I don't actually think it's the biggest problem fixing the Miami dining scene. I think the bigger issue is much closer to home. I know this is not something I can fix, but I want to talk about it. Acknowledging that there's a problem is usually the first step. And I think Miami has a food media problem. Now, before anyone gets offensive, um not pointing fingers at individual writers, in many cases the people working with traditional media are doing the best they can with shrinking budgets, shrinking staffs, impossible deadlines, and the restaurant scene that grows faster than anyone can realistically cover. That's reality. The problem is that somewhere along the way, much of food journalism stopped being reporting and started becoming distribution. Press releases arrive, the same information gets passed around, a publication rewrites it, then another publication rewrites it, and then another, and before long, everyone is publishing essentially the same stories. Sometimes I read multiple articles and find the dishes listed in the same exact order they appeared in the original press release. So this restaurant will have WAGU, this and this, and every publication puts it in the same order. You didn't even bother changing it, rephrasing it, paraphrasing it, whatever. At this point, like what are we doing? Because that's not reporting, that's not opinion, that's just distribution. And unfortunately, actual reviews have become increasingly rare. And the chefs want the actual reviews. Legitimate opinion pieces have become increasingly rare. Writers spending months or years obsessively studying a specific corner of the industry have become increasingly rare. Depth has become rare, but sensationalism thrives, outrage, hype, and perhaps uh nowhere is that more apparent than influencer culture. Influencers making money. Good for them. Seriously, get paid, build your business, um, take the sponsorship, disclose it, support your family. None of that exactly is what bothers me. What bothers me is when advertising gets confused with evaluation. When audiences are led to believe they're receiving objective recommendations when they're really just receiving marketing, and those are all different things. And consumers deserve to understand the difference. The irony in all of this is that while people spend enormous amounts of times accusing the Michelin guide for being pay-to-play, the most obvious examples of pay-to-play often exist elsewhere. They're sitting in plain sight, and yet somehow those conversations rarely happen. Instead, we're busy arguing about inspectors while influencers are posting glowing endorsements of places they were literally paid to promote. Again, make it make sense. And then there's the attention span problem. The same people who spend hours explaining why Michelin doesn't matter are often posting about the next shiny, frivolous out-of-town or new opening 24 hours later. The next flashy dining room, the next celebrity-backed concept, the next place with the perfect lighting package and social media rollout. A restaurant opens, everyone rushes in, everyone posts. Three months later, they've moved on to the next next thing. Meanwhile, the chefs quietly just keep doing their excellent work year after year and are often fighting for scraps of attention. Great restaurants are rarely built overnight, great reputations are rarely built overnight, and great food cities are certainly not built overnight. Which brings me to what I believe might be a real solution or at least an initial kickstart to something better. We need more voices. We need not fewer, we need more. We need more independent thinkers and independent writers, more podcasters, more photographers, more historians, more researchers, more people documenting restaurants, more people documenting chefs, more people documenting the evolution of our dining scene before that history disappeared. Because our story matters. The reason that conversation became so messy that I spoke about earlier is because people stopped caring about the timeline. People stopped caring about context, especially here in Florida, especially here in Miami. I can forgive national publications to getting all the details wrong. And I can forgive someone from another market for misunderstanding our timeline. I cannot excuse local media, however, getting our history wrong. Not when the information exists, not when the people involved are still here. History matters because it allows us to understand how we got here. It allows us to properly recognize the people who laid the foundation. It matters because otherwise every generation believes it invented everything. And trust me, that's not how any of this works. I have chosen my lane. I am comfortable with that. I've chosen food and travel writing, chef interviews, word analysis and coverage. I chose Michelin. I chose the obsessive, often ridiculous task of trying to understand how these systems function. And I'm not leaving that lane. But Miami needs more people choosing theirs. We need more people willing to specialize, willing to become experts and care deeply about a subject and then do the work. Not because it's profitable, but because it matters. The cities deserve people to document them. Restaurants deserve people who understand them, and chefs deserve people who take their work seriously. And because diners deserve information that goes beyond whatever happens to be trending this week. At the end of the day, whether you loved Michelin's results, hated today's Michelin's results, or landed somewhere in between, the chefs will still be back in their kitchens tomorrow. They're still showing up, refining dishes, training teams, pursuing excellence. That's where my attention will remain. On the people doing the work, not on the people performing expertise. So congratulations to every chef, restaurateur, farmer, sommelier, and hospitality professional recognized. Congratulations, congratulations as well to those who weren't, your work still matters. And as for the rest of us, let's do better. Let's support thoughtful criticism without rewarding ignorance. Let's celebrate excellence without turning every achievement into an argument. And for those who continue to be insisting that Michelin doesn't matter, that's certainly you're right. I just find it fascinating that the people who say it matters in the least never seem to be able to talk about it. If you're joining me for the special Michelin Dive Order recap episode, I am Brenda Fernandez for Red Kid, and this is the Wet Live Podcast. See you next time.