Which of the following describes the "Name and Shame" website initiated by the government?

The "Name and Shame" website is a food safety monitoring initiative implemented by the government to enhance public awareness about compliance with health and safety regulations in the food industry. This platform serves to inform the public about establishments that have failed to meet health standards, thereby encouraging better practices within the hospitality sector. The primary aim is to promote transparency and accountability, ensuring that consumers are aware of food safety issues and can make informed decisions about where to dine or purchase food.

This initiative plays a critical role in safeguarding public health by motivating businesses to maintain high standards to avoid negative publicity. By exposing establishments with poor health and safety practices, the program directly supports a culture of compliance and improvement within the food industry. This government approach is particularly effective as it not only discourages non-compliance but also empowers consumers to advocate for their health and safety.

The other options do not accurately reflect the focus and primary function of the "Name and Shame" initiative. While customer reviews might address experiences at dining establishments, they do not have the same regulatory backing or focus on safety. A guide for restaurant promotions or a social media campaign would be more about marketing and public relations rather than accountability in food safety practices.