A common theme tends to emerge when I speak to tourist board representatives. The new strategy, it seems largely across the board, is to target affluent, high-end travellers. The idea is to look for those who spend fairly big while they’re on holiday rather than go for numbers and appeal to mass-market tourism.

India’s approach

In many ways – not least sustainability and pressure on infrastructure – this makes an awful lot of sense. This article from the Times last year, about India encouraging the wealthier tourist rather than backpackers makes for an interesting read. To sum up, India wants well-heeled visitors rather than gap year students. “For a country with India’s overstretched infrastructure, backpackers do more damage than good to the economy,” said the country’s tourism guru Amitabh Kant.

Who are the affluent travellers?

Makes sense, yes? Well – apart from one little thing. It’s all very well trying to appeal to the travellers with deeper pockets, but you also have to identify who these people are. If you were to speculate, you’d say they are generally from well-educated, middle-class backgrounds and are in good, well-paying jobs. They’re also probably at least 30 years old and probably older than that.

And who are the backpackers?

Now then: What’s the difference between this market and the backpacker market? My guess is very little other than ten to twenty years. Jump in a time machine, and today’s backpackers are 2025’s sought-after affluent travellers. Let’s face it, most are either about to go to university or have just finished it; a good proportion come from fairly well-off middle-class families and there’s a good chance that they’ll only be operating on a penny-pinching budget or a certain period of their life.

What makes a destination attractive?

I have a little theory, and it goes a something like this: Backpackers are what makes a destination attractive. I don’t mean this in conventional terms – ie. That people want to go to a place because they’ll be surrounded by young people taking a year out. In fact, some of the places on the banana pancake trail in South East Asia are dire precisely because they’re full of trustafarians having nightly wanker conventions.

Word of mouth

But the key thing to remember is what happens when the backpackers get home. If they’ve had a great time somewhere, they rave about it to others. A buzz starts to generate; a destination starts to become cool; the media latches on; travellers outside the backpacker segment get curious as to what all the fuss is about.

The return

As the years go by, the original backpacker loses a bit of hair and gains a bit of a paunch. He gets a suit and tie, rises up the career ladder and perhaps starts a family. He becomes the type of person that tourist boards are so keen to attract. But he still remembers fondly the time he spent in country X whilst backpacking. The edges of the specifics are dulled, but he still talks fondly of the place to others in more general terms. And then, when the time is right, he might just go back for a very different holiday. In those intervening years, however, he has probably persuaded many to visit – fellow young backpackers at first, but increasingly the well-heeled visitor that India wants.

Two trips through the middle of Australia

Looking at it, I’m an example of this myself. When I was 22, I travelled up the middle of Australia in a backpacker bus. I loved it, although over time I was less able to explain precisely why. This didn’t stop me encouraging others to head through Central Australia however. I returned as a 30-year-old this year with my fiancée, driving a good rental car, staying in comfortable accommodation, indulging in a few fairly expensive tours and experiences and visiting a few places I’d missed the first time round. I had an even better time, and I’m still raving about it to anyone who will listen. Would I have been so keen to spend all that time and money if I’d not visited as a backpacker? I doubt it.

Think forward fifteen years…

Chasing the affluent visitor in the short term has its merits, but it shouldn’t be combined with discouraging the young, independent, shoestring traveller. After all, in fifteen years’ time, you’re probably going to want them back.

The debate about whether journalists and bloggers should accept freebies is so old and hoary that I’m reluctant to bring it up again. But my recent experience in Germany shed a bit of new light on it for me, so tough, back to the well-chewed territory…

For those not in the know, often travel journalists – and increasingly, bloggers – will get hosted free of charge by tourist boards, hotels etc in the hope/ expectation that coverage in certain publications and online outlets will result. Some publications and writers get high and mighty about this, saying they won’t take freebies as it leads to biased coverage. Other writers do take them, and insist that even though they’re accepting the hospitality, it doesn’t influence what they eventually write.

My stance

I stand somewhere in the middle. I no longer go on group press trips (which are usually about herding x number of journalists around on a bus, all covering exactly the same things and with very little if any time to explore independently) but I do accept – and often actively seek – free hotel rooms, tours, attraction tickets etc. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a necessary evil, more about keeping costs down than anything else.

Where I will go against the grain is the issue of bias. Is what I write likely to be biased as a result of accepting hospitality? Yes it is. And any writer that says otherwise is lying to themselves. The key question – and the one that no-one seems to elaborate on as they’re all too busy saying bias is full stop bad and that it doesn’t happen anyway – is “What sort of bias?”

Types of bias

For me, the bias is that if I’ve stayed somewhere for free or done a tour for free, I’m more likely to write about it in some way. This is pretty obvious. I’m less likely to write about something I’ve not experienced. So, yes, I’m more likely to seek to write stories about places and topics where I know I can keep my costs down through hosting. Is that unethical? I’m not sure, but it’s an uncomfortable admission that any writer who does accept freebies should make.

For me, the crucial question is whether not whether something does get coverage but the tone of that coverage. The companies and tourism authorities giving away the freebies aren’t stupid. They know that coverage is far more likely to be positive than negative. The problem comes when this becomes a tacit understanding between host and guest. There are many writers (and I’m sure, bloggers) out there who are quite happy to enter this unspoken pact in order to keep the good life coming. And this is why the whole question of whether to accept comps, FOCS, press trips and famils has come up.

The freebie test

Last week, I found myself put to the test on this front. I was researching a guide to Frankfurt for a newspaper travel section. The tourist board had put me up in what is rated as one of the best hotels in the city. Quite what the deal between the tourist board and the hotel was, I don’t know and I didn’t ask, but it would be fair to assume that all parties would be expecting me to include said hotel in the accommodation section of the guide.

Alas, there was a problem. Or, rather, numerous little problems. The carpets were stained, the maid was knocking on my door expecting to clean my room at 8.20am and then didn’t return by the time I’d got back at 4.30pm, internet access cost EUR22 a day and was excruciatingly slow, breakfast cost EUR32, little bottles of water from the minibar cost EUR7, the towels were thin and paltry rather than big and fluffy… and so on. Nothing in itself was truly awful, but the succession of small things added up to a hotel that is trading on past reputation, is blatantly profiteering at the customer’s expense and has become lazy in catering for its guests. When the (slightly dated and mundane) rooms regularly cost EUR200 a night, this is not good enough. Particularly when I had also inspected other hotels in roughly the same price bracket and they, frankly, were doing a better job.

Best course of action?

There was no way I could honestly recommend the hotel I was being hosted in as one of the best three top end hotels in Frankfurt. So, what does a writer do in this situation? If the answer is to just slip it in anyway as all the other guides do, no-one will pull you up on it and it’ll keep everyone happy, then there is a problem. This, for me, is where the ethical line is crossed.

As far as I was concerned, there was only one thing I could do: leave it out. If I was actually commissioned to review the place rather than pick out three top choices in town, I’d have written a not-exactly-flattering review.

But what about the fact that I was being hosted? How should I deal with the (probably expectant) PR people at the tourist board and, if necessary, the hotel. My solution probably isn’t perfect, but I e-mailed the woman from the tourist board explaining why the hotel would be left out. Unfortunately, I was then collared by one of the management team at check out, who asked how my stay was. I could have just muttered “fine” and sauntered off, but I felt the right thing to do was explain how I felt about the hotel and why I’d not be including it in the story. It was an excruciating couple of minutes, but I still feel it was the right thing to do. To his credit, the chap took it on the chin rather well, admitted to a few of the faults and explained that a substantial refurbishment is on the cards. Good on him – at least he’s aware of the problems and is prepared to deal with them.

The pact

This to me is the pact that you really should be making if, as a writer, you accept free stuff. It’s not the unspoken agreement to provide fluffy, glowing coverage that matters; it’s the responsibility to stand up and explain yourself in situations where your integrity would be compromised by fulfilling that unspoken agreement. And if you’re not prepared to do that, you should think long and hard about whether you’re doing the right job.

In fact, it’s so good, I thought I might share it. The PR’s name has been left off, but everything else is verbatim. Enjoy…

Hanjin Group Opens Navoi Cargo Terminal in Uzbekistan

◎ Korean Air held a ceremony to celebrate the opening of Navoi Cargo Terminal on August 12.

◎ With 1.46 million square feet of space and 100,000 tons of yearly capacity, the new cargo terminal features state-of-the-art facilities.

◎ The Navoi Cargo Terminal is part of Hanjin Group’s ‘Navoi Project’ to grow Navoi as a logistics hub of Central Asia.

◎ Korean Air will expand its cargo network by adding new routes from Navoi this year.

SEOUL, Korea (August 12, 2010) – Hanjin Group, the global comprehensive logistics group comprising air, sea and land transport, is speeding up the project to create a Central Asian logistics hub with the new cargo terminal at Navoi International Airport in Uzbekistan.

On Thursday August 12, senior management of Korean Air, a core subsidiary of Hanjin Group, and Uzbekistan officials gathered at Navoi International Airport to celebrate the opening of the Navoi Cargo Terminal. Among the hundred guests present at the ceremony are Mr. Chang Hoon Chi, President and COO of Korean Air, Mr. Dae Wan Jun, Korean Ambassador to Uzbekistan and Mr. Valeriy Tyan, Director General of Uzbekistan Airways and Head of the Uzbekistan Aviation Administration.

Since January 2009, Hanjin Group has been managing Navoi International Airport hand in hand with the Uzbekistan government to develop Navoi as the logistics hub of Central Asia and to facilitate Korean companies’ entry into the market. Hanjin’s ‘Navoi Project’ includes modernizing airport facilities, expanding global air cargo network and constructing the advanced logistics complex.  

“The new Navoi Cargo Terminal has been designed based on the Korean Air’s state-of-the-art cargo terminals at Incheon International Airport which leads the global cargo industry by setting very high standard. The Navoi Cargo Terminal is set to become the center of the modern day “Silk Road” with its advanced airport infrastructure,” Mr. Chang Hoon Chi, President and COO of Korean Air said.

“Korean Air will spare no effort in supporting the growth of Navoi into Central Asia’s best logistics hub, expanding global network and practicing aggressive marketing strategies as Korean Air participates in the airport management,” he added.

With construction underway since December 2008, the newly unveiled Navoi Cargo Terminal has been developed as part of the project to modernize airport infrastructure for Uzbekistan. The new terminal, with total floor space of 160,382 square feet on a 1.46 million square feet site, is designed to handle 100,000 tons of cargo a year and features state-of-the-art facilities such as refrigerated warehouses and quarantine stations. The Navoi Cargo Terminal’s capacity will be upgraded to process up to 500,000 tons of cargo a year as global cargo demand increases.    

The Navoi Cargo Terminal has been successfully completed thanks to the consistent support and technological know-how of Korean Air, which is the number one commercial air cargo carrier in every aspect from construction, operation and ground handling. Uzbekistan officials, including Mr. Rustam Azimov, First Deputy Prime Minister of Uzbekistan, has visited Korean Air’s cutting-edge cargo terminals at Incheon International Airport a number of times. Impressed very much by the success of Incheon, Mr. Azimov had ordered to design and build the Navoi Cargo Terminal jointly with Korean Air.

By opening the new fuel storage tank which can store sufficient fuel for 27 B747-400 jumbo freighters, all core infrastructure for Navoi International Airport to become a logistics hub will be set up in stages.

As part of efforts to develop Navoi, Korean Air has been operating its cargo flights from Incheon to Milan and Brussels via Navoi Airport seven times a week since 2008. Also, direct cargo flights from Navoi to Deli, Mumbai, Bangkok and Frankfurt have been flying nine times a week since last year. With the new Navoi Cargo Terminal now available, Korean Air will add its cargo routes from Navoi to Istanbul, Dubai, Almaty(Kazakhstan) and Dacca(Bangladesh) this year.

Hanjin Group has been conducting a variety of projects to create Navoi as a logistics hub of Central Asia.  Hanjin Transportation Co., Ltd. has co-established ‘Eurasia Logistics Service’ with one of the local ground transport companies and has been strengthening the ground network of Central Asia. Eurasia Logistic Service will cooperate with Korean Air’s cargo terminal and air cargo network, and establish a land transport network in Central Asia.

Also, Hanjin Group is currently constructing a residential complex in Uzbekistan for foreign investing companies to be located in the Free Industrial-Economic Zone, enhancing convenience of workers by providing accommodation and other facilities. As a first step, a 71,042 square-foot hotel with various facilities for business and leisure is planned to open this September.  

-Ends-

About Korean Air:

In 2009, Business Traveler magazine honored Korean Air for the fourth consecutive year as having the “Best Transpacific Business Class” and ranked it “The Best Airline in Asia” for three consecutive years; TTG Asia rated it as the Best North Asian Airline; the carrier was named the 2009 winner of the Global Travel Catering Distinction Award by Pax International magazine; World Traveler magazine rated it has having the world’s best inflight service; readers of Travel & Leisure magazine said it is one of the world’s top 10 international airlines, and readers of Conde Nast Traveler magazine voted it has having one of the world’s top five business classes.

Korean Air, with a fleet of 132 aircraft, is one of the world’s top 20 airlines, and operates almost 400 passenger flights per day to 117 cities in 39 countries. It is a founding member of the SkyTeam alliance, together with its thirteen members, offers its 395 million annual passengers a worldwide system of more than 13,000 daily flights covering 898 destinations in 169 countries. The alliance celebrated its 10th anniversary in June 2010.

More on Korean Air’s programs, routes, frequency and partners is available at www.koreanair.com.

As some of my regular readers may be aware, I recently spent two months travelling around Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Singapore. I was on a somewhat whistlestop round-the-world trip, and I primarily did it because I had a number of commissions for various clients in the UK and Australia.

Blogging gig

But I also managed to find myself with a regular blogging gig. Which, for someone who still sees himself as an old school print journalist with an online arm, was veering into uncharted territory.

This was particularly the case as I wasn’t writing for a traditional publication – be it paper, magazine or online travel site. I was writing for the website of a company that specialises in selling round the world flight tickets.

I’ll not go into the full financial arrangements or Roundtheworldflights.com’s reasons for wanting the blog content. Suffice to say, we both came to a deal that we were happy with and thought was beneficial to both parties.

Ethical grey line

However, this meant that my feet were rather close to an ethical grey line. Essentially, this was corporate work. Would I be veering too close to PR and compromising my independence and integrity? It was something I was a little uncomfortable with.

Compromise?

It was, therefore, a surprise to feel less compromised than I normally do. When I’m pitching and writing articles for my usual clients there are a number of hidden pressures. Negative stories are nigh on impossible to sell, so I am always looking for the positive spin. I’m rarely able to write freely about what I found most interesting, as there needs to be a strong focus on a certain angle or storyline. I write with the readers – many of whom won’t share my mindset or tastes – in mind.

In short, the level of constraint in writing a normal commissioned travel article is surprisingly high. This is not necessarily a bad thing – editors need to focus their content on their readership and give a reason to pick up rather than just letting writers blather on.

Corporate constraints

But surely writing blog posts for a company like I’ve just done is likely to have even more restrictions and limitations? Surprisingly, for me, this wasn’t the case. This is partly because Roundtheworldflights.com wanted me because my style and mindset fitted the company, rather than me having to adapt to fit the company tone.

We came to the arrangement because they liked my writing and voice; it wasn’t a case of me adapting it to the needs of their company. The guidance was also remarkably hands off – too. I was trusted to find the most interesting things to write about, and then write about them.

Freedom

To me, this was a thoroughly enjoyable, almost unprecedented level of freedom. Some posts were hardly about travel at all – one on Singapore veered into social comment, whilst others were slices of whimsy about sheep love and ridiculous fibreglass animals.

Other posts were on topics I could never get away with writing about for my usual clients. Which newspaper travel section is going to take a piece on running a gauntlet of heroin addicts in Vancouver, for example? Which web portal will eschew the usual top ten list for a rambling account of doing joyous nothing?

It was odd. I actually had more freedom and independence to write about what I liked, and arguably more integrity as I wasn’t leaving out the bits I’d usually have to discard. And from all the feedback I’ve had, most people reading the blog have enjoyed this factor.

Utilising content

In coming years, I can see more companies following this avenue of promotion. It makes sense in many ways – bringing in traffic, inspiring potential customers, unique identity, humanising a company and matching products to audience – to enhance a website with plenty of well-written content. The key is making sure that writer and company are a good match. And, from a writer’s perspective, feeling that you’re able to take the gig without compromising your integrity and reputation elsewhere.

Do you think writing for a corporate site compromises a journalist’s independence and integrity? Share your thoughts below.

I am acutely aware that there is more to doing travel PR than forever leaping every time a journalist clicks their fingers. In fact, some PRs may argue that dealing with journalists only forms a small part of their job.

But it is a part of the job nonetheless, and the whole process can be made a lot easier by for all concerned by doing one simple thing: making it obvious who you represent.

Who are the clients?

I hold up, as a classic example, Euro RSCG Biss Lancaster. Their website is, alas, something of a monstrosity and appears to be written in an unknown language that closely resembles corporate-ese. But the main problem is that I have no idea who their clients are. Sure, there are three case studies presented there, but are they past or present clients? What else is in the portfolio? Why is it worth bearing Euro RSCG Biss Lancaster in mind as a potentially useful contact?

Faust PR does exactly the same thing. A couple of testimonials is the only hint of clientele.

Big vs small

Even big multinational PR agencies fall into the same trap. Fleishman-Hillard proudly lists contacts to all of its offices around the globe, but doesn’t name a single client that it represents.

When you’re big, you’re probably going to get away with it. But if you’re small, it can make you look even smaller. Take Cartwright Communications – seemingly a one woman operation – the lack of a client list makes it simply look as though she hasn’t got any clients.

There’s nothing wrong with being a one woman operation, of course. In fact many of the best, most helpful PRs I have come across work like this. But they also make it quite clear who they work for.

Why you should have a client list on your website

But why is it useful to have a client list on your website? Let’s use the example of Saltmarsh PR – a company I deal with on a regular basis. In May 2008, I went to Iceland. I discovered that Saltmarsh handled the Iceland Tourism account, dropped them a line and found them very helpful.

At the same time, I had a peek at their website to see who else they deal with. Dominica and Montserrat piqued my interest, and I ended up building both into my Caribbean trip in February 2009, generating a whole host of stories on both islands as a result. Would this have happened if I didn’t know which agency represented the islands? Unlikely.

How journalists work

It’s ever so simple: journalists are rarely working on just one story at any one time. And if they can spot someone that can help with story B or C whilst researching story A, then they might well use them. If I’m researching a piece on Xville, and can say “I see you also represent Hotel Y in place Z – that fits another piece I’m doing” then it’s helpful for all concerned.

Who works on which account?

From my perspective, the people working on the account should be listed on the website too. BGB half gets this right – under their client section there is a link to an email form that will contact the whole team working on that particular account (such as the Visit Sweden page, for example). Ideally, a list of staff working on the account would be on the client detail page, however.

Helping journalists and prospective clients

In terms of dealing with journalists, simply listing clients and the account managers that work with them on your website makes perfect sense. It helps all concerned, should in theory prevent enquiries going to the wrong person and gives a little boost to your other clients. Keeping the site updated and accurate isn’t too arduous a task either.

And surely it makes sense in terms of attracting other business too? After all, prospective clients checking your firm over will almost certainly look at your website to see who else you handle…

*****************************

Grumpy Traveller Recommended Read

Whilst travelling up the middle of Australia, I read The Dog Fence by James Woodford. It’s a simple tale of the author’s trip across the country, following the longest structure ever built by mankind. Wisely, Woodford shuns the Tony Hawks ‘look at me and my wacky fridge full of Moldovan tennis players’ approach, and plays it straight.

The book isn’t about him, or really his journey, but the people who live alongside the giant fence keeping dingos out of south-eastern Australia, and the incredible characters who keep it maintained.

It’s an atmospheric, eye-opening read that lets great stories tell themselves.

If you buy from Amazon UK or Amazon US using these links, I earn a small commission, but I recommend The Dog Fence irrespective of where you purchase it.

*****************************

An indecent proposal?

Two weeks I received an e-mail from a company which was offering to pay me for writing blog posts about products it sells. Moreover, the chap e-mailing me said it would increase the payment if I could get coverage in other outlets I am commissioned to write for.

The old school journalist in me felt immediately affronted. How dare this man suggest that I impugn my reputation by shilling his irrelevant goodies to all and sundry. I’m a professional journalist, don’t you know – if you want adverts, you can buy advertising space like everyone else.

And a strong instinct told me: “That’s unethical.”

Why the anger?

But then I had to think about what was making me angry. If I look at it rationally, the first thing was that he’s clearly not read through my site. If he has, then there’s clearly no way that fluffy advertorial about said company’s products is a good match. Secondly, it seems as though I’m being asked to risk my reputation to constantly plugging Travel Firm X in commissioned articles in return for cash.

Spot the difference

And here comes the reason for the second rewrite. Realistically, how different is this from what I do anyway? I get lots of free stuff as I’m going about my business – hotels, tours, drivers, meals. All of that is obtained with the knowledge that I’m going to be writing about it. What’s more, I have specifically pitched out article ideas to editors based around somewhere I know I’m going to be staying at/ eating at/ visiting for free. How different is the suggestion I was so offended by?

Travel writing model

In fact, it’s not too far away from a travel writing model that Matthew Teller proposed a few months ago; one that I, with a few reservations, broadly agreed with as being potentially workable.

Travel writing for travel firms

Moreover, I already take the corporate shilling from other companies. I write blog posts fairly regularly for Viator and am soon to do so for Roundtheworldflights.com. In the spirit of full disclosure, I also get free tours from Viator and have written about them for other publications.

It goes on: there are adverts on this site that I would make money from if anyone ever bought anything as a result, and I’ve got two other sites (Australiaflightbargains.com and Bestflightsales.com) that are clearly aimed at making money from people buying things – although I’d hope they’re still genuinely useful.

I’ve also recommended Premier Inns and Samoa on this site, when I’ve had freebies from both in the past. Why should I be so infuriated about being offered payment for writing about this company’s products?

The credibility factor

Here’s why: The company making this unusual proposal showed me two examples of other bloggers it was working with. I was struck by one thing: I would be ashamed if such utterly promotional sponsored posts appeared on my site. If they did, I’d feel what credibility I have oozing away. And it would disappear even faster once I started shoehorning plugs into articles I’m being paid to write.

Critical and honest?

And realistically, how on earth are you going to write critically and honestly about something on your own site when you know that payment is dependent on the coverage given? This is key – when I am commissioned to write for other publications and get free stuff, I always tell it how I see it.

I have given bad write-ups to five star hotels that have lavished hospitality upon me, and would do so again. I have told others that their hotel/ tour/ experience wouldn’t feature in an article – after being hosted – as it wasn’t good enough.

Could I do that on my own site, knowing that if I did so the money would almost certainly dry up? Probably not. And as for the shoehorning that would go on when I’m effectively on commission for placing articles, I don’t even want to think about it.

Editorial integrity

I respect a blogger/ writer’s right to earn a living, and I respect a company’s right to promote their product. But, to me, a line is crossed when editorial integrity is trampled on and a journalist becomes a ‘brand ambassador’. I have the same disdain for sponsored posts that I have for advertorials in newspapers – there shouldn’t be a place for them. This just doesn’t feel like the right way of going about things.

Other bloggers

I know that this company has approached other bloggers, and I shall await with interest to see who takes it up on the offer. The approach seems to be pretty indiscriminate rather than targeted towards bloggers who may be a natural fit for the products sold.

That instantly reduces the company’s credibility in my opinion, and makes it one that I would not want to use, let alone be associated with. And the same probably applies to anyone who trots out a horrendous sponsored post that has nothing to do with their site, just to make $20 to $30.

Any thoughts?

I’d be interested to hear the thoughts of other bloggers and journalists on this one. Is the proposal I mentioned reasonable – or does it cross an ethical boundary? Is this the way the world of blogging is? Am I being naive?

Difference between bloggers and journalists

A few weeks ago, the ever-excellent Matthew Teller hosted a debate on his blog about the difference between bloggers and journalists.

It’s something of a hoary old debate, but some excellent points were raised. Key amongst these are that journalists get edited and bloggers – by and large – don’t.

A platform for all

My personal view is that the title – blogger, writer, columnist, journalist – doesn’t matter. Everyone should be judged on the quality of what they write. What the blogosphere changes is the number of people given a platform. Anyone can set up a blog and spout off about what they like. Sometimes this leads to brilliant writing, useful information dissemination and must-read insight.

Dull writing

More often than not, alas, it leads to turgid, generic wordblather that could just as easily have been turned out by a trained dolphin picking out random excerpts from tourist board press releases. Some of the bloggers who do this are inexplicably popular – largely, I suspect, because there is an informal network of similar bloggers indulging each other in relentless cross-promotion.

But this isn’t necessarily a failure of blogging as a medium – there’s enough turgid, generic wordblather printed in traditional newspapers and magazines to turn the Amazon into a barren plain.

One of the worst travel guides you’ll ever see

The real problem comes when material is published on blogs that is so outrageously awful that it becomes misleading. For example of this, look no further than this execrable piece on doing Dubai on a budget. It is written by someone who managed to spend US$10,000 in a week and a half – and that’s including getting free accommodation most of the way due to her clearly being on a junket sponsored by Intercontinental Hotels. Not that there is any disclosure of this junket – it’s just obvious from the fact that the only hotels mentioned as budget accommodation options are owned by Intercontinental Hotels.

Straight from the guidebook?

Most of the other information, if not ripped straight out of someone else’s guidebook, may as well have been. The author rarely offers any indication that she has actually been to Dubai, and when she does, the true horrors emerge.

The worst bits

A couple of sample paragraphs:

“Lunch and other dinners can be eaten at McDonalds, Kentucky Fried Chicken (very popular in Dubai), and other cheap eateries. I have made it a tradition to eat at international McDonald’s around the world.”

And…

“Try to visit the poor areas of Dubai like the town of Deira to people watch and take photos. As any place, Dubai has non wealthy areas known as the slums.”

Is this really budget Dubai?

Both stagger me. So the way to enjoy Dubai on a budget is to eat a Big Mac and take pictures of poor people in ‘slums’? (Incidentally, having been to Deira, I can safely say that whilst standards of housing are lower, ‘slum’ in the sense that any normal person would know it – ie. Mumbai, South African townships – is way off the mark.)

What we essentially have here is a writer who can’t stick to a budget herself, writing what masquerades as a guide to doing a destination on a budget. She has clearly done little independent research, she shows no insight and she continually slips in completely out-of-context mentions for companies that have given her free stuff. It’s an appalling piece of at best misleading and at worst deceitful writing, and should never have been published.

Second class citizens

But because it’s a blog, it can be published. And that, in a nutshell, is why bloggers are likely to remain as second class citizens in comparison to commissioned journalists unless something changes rather drastically.

It’s fine when it comes to spouting opinion – everyone’s entitled to their own. But when it comes to presenting information and guidance, then it is logical to defer to someone who has been commissioned and paid – by someone who is, in turn, hired and paid to do the commissioning and editing. This is not to say that a blogged guide can’t be better than one in a newspaper – often it can – but that when a commissioned journalist has had a guide accepted and edited, more checks and balances are in place.

Not bad for a blog

It was telling that when I Tweeted criticising this article, I was told by someone whose views I respect that I was being a bit harsh. My correspondent said that it wasn’t too bad ‘for a blog post’, although obviously it was unacceptably poor as a commissioned article.

My response was “Why should there be any difference?” Why shouldn’t a guide be exacted to the same scrutiny whether published on a blog, in a newspaper or in a book?

How to repair a Yamaha FJR1300A

Alas, everyone can blog, whether they know what they’re talking about. I could make my next blog post an 800-word guide to repairing a Yamaha FJR1300A motorbike if I wanted to. That I don’t know what I’m talking about is irrelevant – I CAN do it.

The web is full of people writing things because they can and they’re entitled too. Little thought is paid to whether they should do so or can genuinely offer a useful slant/ insight. And this is the stumbling block that all good bloggers face – your work and medium is denigrated by the millions who don’t know when to shut up.

Apologies for this blog being quiet of late – I am currently in the middle of a fairly exhausting jaunt through South Africa.

As part of this trip, I have been doing a lot of tours, and as a result, have come to a conclusion or two about how tour operators and tourism authorities should deal with journalists.

Solo tours

A couple of times since I have been here, it has been just me on the tour. To all intents and purposes, it has been put on because I am writing about the destinations visited and – in all probability – the product that the tour company provides.

Problem with tours for journalists

And on more than one occasion, there has been a classic problem: the tour has been set up with me in mind. This means that the driver/ guide asks what I want to do, and the tour is adapted here and there to take in aspects of other tours that the company offers.

More material?

Brilliant, you’d think. I get to cover more ground and get more material for my article(s). But it’s not – it’s counter-productive for both me and the tour operator. Put simply, when the tour is adapted for my needs, I have no idea of what the real tour is. I can’t review it accurately, I can’t recommend it.

Focus

I can certainly write about the places I’ve visited as part of my tour, and frequently do so. But the focus has to be on the places rather than the tour itself. I can’t bring in the guide’s character, point out aspects that are neatly done or really say anything more than “XXX runs a tour of YYY for $ZZZ” in the factbox.

Tip for tour operators

So, tour operators, if you really want writers to focus on your product as well as the places you visit, this is the best way of doing it: Just do what you normally do.

No special treatment

The best possible scenario, from my perspective, is simply to book me on as another passenger and don’t tell the driver who I am. I don’t want special treatment; I want the other passengers to take up the conversational slack (those one-on-one tours can be mentally exhausting because of the need to strike up constant conversation). And most importantly, I want to see what you do.

This won’t always result in acres of publicity – mostly it is the place rather than the tour itself that counts – but at least give yourself a sporting chance. Do what you do well, and stick to it, and writers will thank you heartily for this.

Jeremy Head has written a characteristically interesting post on whether travel content that has been paid for by a company can ever be objective.

As part of the debate, he references Matthew Teller’s proposal about PR agencies and tourist boards paying travel writers for articles rather than the publications they are published in.

How travel writers can earn money: an idea

Reading through, I was struck by a compromise. It’s not one I’m 100% comfortable with, but I’m playing Devil’s advocate. It goes a little like this:

-          The PR company, hotel, tour operator or tourist board hosts the travel writer on their visit. This happens already, and is no great secret.

-          The travel writer then writes a small article or blog post for the PR company’s website sharing his thoughts on the trip and the destination.

-          For doing this article/ blog post, the travel writer is paid a fee by the PR company.

-          The travel writer then tries to sell – or chooses to give away – a separate story to one of the publications he or she writes for. As he or she would do normally.

-          In the article for Publication X, the writer and publication should still disclose that the writer was the guest of the tourist board. (Sadly, too few publications make such disclosures).

PR companies and selective hosting

PR companies tend to be rather selective about who they host on group or individual press trips anyway. They will rarely provide flights, accommodation, meals, activities etc for a writer who has not got a commission.

Separate commissions

Under the above scenario, very little changes from an ethical perspective. The commission to write for the company blog and the commission to write for Publication X are entirely separate. How the writer goes about obtaining commission X is a matter of personal choice.

Is it worth writing for Publication X for free in return for getting the assistance that allows the writer to gain material that he can possibly sell elsewhere – as well as the fee for writing for Company X’s blog? Perhaps.

Reducing cost of a trip

Some writers already use a variation of this, myself included. I have a couple of outlets that don’t pay very much, but it’s useful to write for them so that I can obtain assistance from tourist boards. I’ll get a very small fee from the low-paying outlet, but writing there allows me to keep the cost of my trip down and earn good money writing about it for other outlets.

Problems with the compromise

Potential problems with my suggested scenario? Well, there are a few:

-          PRs decide that the travel writers are middlemen and cut them out. But would travel editors accept copy straight from a PR?

-          Would this suck even more money out of the market for travel writers, ensuring that NO publications pay for travel content?

-          Would this take us even further down the road where the only places being written about are the ones with a hefty marketing budget?

-          Well, it just doesn’t seem quite right, does it? I really don’t like the idea of giving away any work for free, irrespective of the benefits that can be gained from it elsewhere.

Writers, PRs, editors… what do you think? Feel free to share your thoughts below by leaving a comment.

1. It’s not addressed to me

If you’ve sent it to everyone on your mailing list in the hope that it fits something that someone, somewhere is writing about, then it probably doesn’t fit something I’m writing about.

2. You spelt my name wrong

One of my editors managed to spell my surname three different ways in the same issue of the magazine. I hated it, but she paid me. If you do it, I’m unlikely to be quite as sympathetic.

3. It appears as though you don’t even know me

The way of getting round the above problem is not to put “Hi David, I thought you might be interested in this”. Well, not if what follows is exactly the same as what is on every other press release. PR companies who do know me have a rough idea who I write for and what about, and will suggest specific things that may be a decent fit.

4. It’s about cruising/ skiing/family breaks in Orlando

Not my cup of tea. Sorry.

5. It starts with “Hotel X has…”

Nothing says “non-story” more than the headline beginning with the name of the hotel/ travel company claiming it is a story.

6. It’s clearly an internal report

This is a personal favourite from last week: “Hawaii Tourism Authority Reports On Travel To Hawaii.” Brilliant, just brilliant. Hold the front page. The same applies to any ‘stories’ that just happen to be a set of dry stats on the latest visitor numbers.

7. It’s written entirely in marketing-ese

So 50% of staycationing voluntourists prefer to go glamping on their babymoons, do they? Delete.

8. You’ve already sent me three press releases about this client in a month

None of them were of any interest, so the fourth is hardly likely to be either.

9. You’ve messed me around in the past

You know when I came to you asking for help with a certain article and you gave me short shrift? Well, your other clients have gone to the bottom of the list of ones I am looking to mention in articles.

10. You’re an airline and have launched a new lounge/ business class peanuts

It might be important to you, but it’s not a story. Oh yes, and remember that time when I asked you for assistance on flights to a destination you fly to and I was writing about? Remember how you offered a ‘media rate’ that was actually more expensive than the one I could get on your own website? Well you’ve got no right to go round expecting favours from someone who could make your new bit of pathetic fluffy trivia into a story.

11. Your client is totally irrelevant to the story

So a new museum has opened in Paris, has it? Great – but the fact that you have a hotel that is also in Paris doesn’t make your hotel part of the story. Sorry.

12. You’ve attached pictures, just in case I need them.

I don’t, and they’ve ensured that your e-mail is about 10MB. Poor form, old chap.