What's the purpose of including the entire bill? They also left out some key det...

jasonlynes · on March 6, 2011

it's the format of the piece. he goes to lunch with interesting people at interesting places and includes what they ate.

angstrom · on March 6, 2011

That's great and all, but what I really wanted to know is how he used his napkin? Was it folded in a triangle in his lap or a rectangle...gasp, did he use one at all?!

Superfluous information is superfluous information.

That said, I still skimmed it for the bits and pieces I found interesting.

rdouble · on March 6, 2011

As part of the format, the magazine pays except in one of the articles where the interviewee insisted on paying.

tesseract · on March 6, 2011

My understanding is that it is the norm in journalism for the interviewer to pay for the meal, when an interview is conducted over one.

I can think of a few reasons for this, but the ethical one (avoiding the appearance of bribery etc.) seems by far the most obvious and important.

chalst · on March 6, 2011

The bill is fascinating!

The FT is always supposed to pay; if somehow it didn't, you can expect the piece to say so.

The tip is grouped together with tax, not separately enumerated.