To be honest I thought in many ways it was pretty spot on for the UK as well. The company I work for has a brand tracking product that looks at the casual dining sector[1] from the perspective of consumers: https://savanta.com/product/brandvue-eating-out/.

You can easily find problems around a lot of the points raised in this post in our dataset. If you cut too much around areas like food quality and service your NPS is going to slide, and if not turned around it becomes a leading indicator that the end is looming (e.g., Jamie's Italian).

We obviously don't track independent restaurants - chains only - but you can certainly see the effects of high rent and absolutely swingeing business rates[2] coupled with heavy downward pressure on prices across the whole sector.

[1] This isn't just restaurant chains: it includes pubs, cafes, fast food, etc.

[2] These are nothing short of an outrage in many parts of the UK. Local government will often complain about their moribund high streets, but do little to help their cause. The reality is that with costs as high as they are, and the convenience of online and delivery, it's extremely difficult for any kind of outlet to make money on the British high street.

High Street rents are incredibly high. I'm in one of the poorest UK cities, but even here - with (literally) every other shop empty - rents are phenomenal.

But then property owners are accruing financial value through property price rises, they don't need to have leasees, they're still making money.

I don't understand why the Council isn't super harsh on property maintenance (absent landlords let their properties bring down the appearance of an area); and why the gov. don't levy high taxes for empty commercial properties. IMO high-street properties that are empty should be a heavy loss on landlords.

When their title is "Why Restaurants Are So Fucked" instead of "Why Restaurants In America Are So Fucked" is why.

I think one is expected to understand the context oneself or else the first time one's spouse says "There aren't any eggs" one may receive a terrific fright at the thought of the impending doom of all sexual reproduction on the planet.

the 'context onself' is americans talking about america. got it.

The issue here is that the vast majority of American articles make no effort to convey the fact they are talking about America.

The internet is a _global_ space and there's very little effort required to make the distinction.

I would argue that the writers of these articles are the ones not understanding the "context of oneself" given how they think their readership is entirely American.

So now should every article written in the Atlanta Journal Constitution published on the internet mention that they are talking about Atlanta in the headline?

Perhaps because the author (and restaurant) are Canadian?

Maybe just adjust to title to avoid generalization. "Why Restaurants Are So Fucked in the US". Showing awareness goes a long way.

Neither the author nor the restaurant are American; even the example they use is Doner Kebab, a term that's not widely in use in America. What awareness exactly would the author be showing by adding a random country's name to her article title?