Six To Try: The Best Pancakes in Sydney. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Sensationalism / Clickbait-style framing

Using superlative or dramatic language to make content seem more exciting or definitive than it is, especially in titles like 'best' lists.

Title: "Six To Try: The Best Pancakes in Sydney". The article presents six venues as having "the best" pancakes in all of Sydney without clarifying that this is the author’s opinion or based on limited sampling. Phrases like "a cut above the rest" and "the internet’s obsessed with" also heighten the sense of hype beyond what is evidenced.

3 suggestions

Change the title to a more clearly subjective or modest framing, e.g. "Six Great Pancakes to Try in Sydney" or "Six of Our Favourite Pancakes in Sydney" instead of "The Best Pancakes in Sydney".

Replace "a cut above the rest" with something more measured, e.g. "stand out for their quality" or "are particularly popular with regulars" and, if possible, add a brief reason (e.g. technique, ingredients).

Qualify broad claims with attribution, e.g. "This is the brekkie-cake many on social media are talking about" instead of "the internet’s obsessed with" unless data is provided.

Unsubstantiated claims

Statements presented as fact without evidence, data, or clear attribution to opinion.

Examples include: - "This half-dozen pancakes … are a cut above the rest." - "You could consider Bill Granger’s ricotta hotcakes the Sydney pancake. They are a big reason Australia’s cafe culture is world renowned…" - "These pancakes are adored – and 'proper'." - "People queue for the perfected rounds…" - "The all-day brekkie menu … is a riot." - "…but it’s just as outstanding on its lonesome." - "This is the brekkie-cake the internet’s obsessed with…" and "worth getting for the table". These are presented as factual descriptions rather than clearly marked as subjective impressions or supported by data (e.g. reviews, awards, queue lengths, social media metrics).

4 suggestions

Add attribution markers to subjective judgments, e.g. "In our view, this half-dozen pancakes…" or "Regulars say these pancakes are 'proper' and 'adored'."

Where possible, support popularity claims with concrete indicators, e.g. "On weekends, it’s common to see queues out the door" or "The cafe reports serving an average of X pancake orders per day" instead of simply "People queue".

For broad cultural claims like "a big reason Australia’s cafe culture is world renowned", either provide a source (e.g. references to international coverage) or soften to: "have helped shape Sydney’s cafe reputation".

For "the internet’s obsessed with", either cite specific metrics (e.g. "has over X million views on TikTok") or rephrase to "has attracted a lot of attention on social media".

Appeal to authority / popularity

Using status, fame, or popularity as primary justification for a claim rather than providing substantive evidence.

Examples: - "You could consider Bill Granger’s ricotta hotcakes the Sydney pancake. They are a big reason Australia’s cafe culture is world renowned…" (appeal to Bill Granger’s status and the dish’s longevity as proof of quality). - "In 2025, 14,793 of these plate-fillers were eaten… By anyone's maths, that’s a popular pancake." (appeal to sales volume as a proxy for quality). - "This is the brekkie-cake the internet’s obsessed with" (appeal to online popularity as evidence of merit). These rely on fame, sales, or online buzz rather than describing objective qualities (ingredients, technique, taste profile) that justify the recommendation.

3 suggestions

Balance references to popularity or fame with concrete descriptive criteria, e.g. "Bill Granger’s ricotta hotcakes, known for their light texture and ricotta richness, have been on the menu since 1992 and are widely imitated."

For Valentina’s, instead of implying that sales alone prove quality, add context: "14,793 of these plate-fillers were eaten in 2025, reflecting strong local demand for their thick, buttery style."

For social media references, rephrase to avoid implying that popularity equals quality, e.g. "The pancake has gone viral on social media, drawing attention to its [describe features]."

Biased / promotional language

Using value-laden, marketing-style adjectives that promote rather than neutrally describe.

The article uses many promotional adjectives and metaphors: - "sweet little inner west cafe" - "a cut above the rest" - "splodgy, squishy beauties" - "The power play? Dining with a mate…" - "These pancakes are adored – and 'proper'." - "People queue for the perfected rounds…" - "The all-day brekkie menu … is a riot." - "the whopping oat pancake… is something special." - "outstanding on its lonesome." - "the brekkie-cake the internet’s obsessed with" and "worth getting for the table". This language nudges readers toward a positive evaluation rather than simply informing them.

4 suggestions

Replace subjective adjectives with neutral, descriptive terms, e.g. "small inner west cafe" instead of "sweet little inner west cafe".

Describe sensory qualities instead of using evaluative labels: e.g. "thick, cake-like texture" instead of "a cut above the rest"; "soft and airy with a crisp edge" instead of "splodgy, squishy beauties".

Avoid marketing-style constructions like "The power play?" and "worth getting for the table"; instead, state options neutrally: "Many diners choose to share both the hotcakes and the corn fritters."

For "perfected rounds" and "something special", specify what is distinctive (e.g. use of particular flour, fermentation, cooking method) rather than asserting perfection.

Oversimplification / lack of context

Presenting a complex or broad claim in a simplified way without clarifying scope or limitations.

The phrase "They are a big reason Australia’s cafe culture is world renowned" oversimplifies the development and international reputation of Australian cafe culture by attributing a large share of credit to one dish at one brand. Similarly, calling these six pancakes "the best in Sydney" implies a comprehensive assessment of all options in a large city without explaining selection criteria or limitations.

3 suggestions

Qualify the cultural claim, e.g. "They have played a notable role in shaping Sydney’s cafe reputation" or "They’re among the dishes often cited in international coverage of Australian cafes."

Add a brief note on selection criteria, e.g. "This list highlights six notable pancakes across different suburbs; it is not an exhaustive ranking of every pancake in Sydney."

Change "the best" to "some of the best we’ve tried" or "standout" to acknowledge subjectivity and limits of the review.