Sarah Hartley's back from some travels:
But as I finished writing up and downloading the pictures of a recent trip to Dublin, I started wondering how aware readers are about how these, often glossy, pieces of journalism come to be in their daily newspapers.
Paid for by the hosting holiday company (cost would obviously make the activity otherwise prohibitive), it could be seen as a semi-commercial activity. In itself perhaps not so much a problem, but do we always make that distinction crystal clear?
A former boss of mine used to describe paid-for trips (alongside assorted other gifts) as "moral hazards", and he discouraged us from taking them in most circumstances.
But, as Sarah points out, in this situation a lot of travel journalism just wouldn't happen, because the costs involved in sending the hack on holiday outweigh the benefit of having the report in the paper. Yet, I'd imagine that the majority of the readers are unaware that these are paid for trips. Of course, there's another layer in here, in that the travel industry works on the back of the familiarisation trip, or "fam trip", whereby agents are sent on the holidays people want them to sell to their clients. Travel Weekly's B2B journalists will be blogging some of these on its new Postcards blog (still under construction at the time of writing).
But what are the ethical issues here? How would readers feel if they knew that all the trips had been paid for by the company running them?
I'd be interested in what my colleagues from Travel Weekly and Travolution think about this...
Interesting dilemma. As a former press consultant for Visit Britain, I'm very familiar with how the travel industry and travel journalism works in this respect. In Norway, the nationals tend to insist on paying the costs themselves if they do participate in fam trips, while freelancers rarely get a budget to cover costs, and smaller publications simply don't have such a budget. I do think it's fair to disclose whether or not one has received any funding for trips to destinations one writes about though. When it comes to destination markeeters and travel companies: one thing is to facilitate good experieces, provide information about new products etc, another to try to hijack journos or decide the gist of the coverage. The latter does happen, but, journos being journos, it usually backfires:-)
I've always assumed that travel journalists trips have been paid for by the travel company. Mainly because of the small print in the reports, ie xxx was a guest of yyy.
Hi Adam
Rachel's right. I don't think anybody took a blind bit of notice when they read "Neil MacLean was a guest of Kuoni Travel" at the end of a Sunday Times articles.
But possibly that was because nobody bothered reading to the end.
There were certainly no stiff letters to the editor accusing us of toadying to the operator.
There are two easily identified kinds of travel writers on press trips. The regulars who have seen it all and won't be swayed into writing complementary bumff by a limo at the airport or another bloody mary. And the occasional travel writer whose turn for a freebie has come up in the office lottery, but who also has to take the time out of their annual leave (the Daily Express always used to do that).
They are going to enjoy it, beside the pool, in the dining room and in the bar and they are the ones who tend to write the puff pieces and gush for Britain.
Their articles should come with big L signs, never mind a credit at the end.
Tour operators are still being talked into setting up press trips by their PR's but many have seen the light - or at least done their sums - and have worked out that it just isn't worth it any more.
And the smarter papers and their online sections have realised they can get more insight into a destination from people already on the ground than from sending the showbiz deparment's PA off for a three day knees-up.
Would just say that travel writing in general is dogged by ethics – famous authors are renowned for fictionalising to create a better read. And these days it’s more obvious that travel is a highly subjective area – in years gone by it was solely the territory of the white male explorer, and although there are now many other perspectives being written, pretty much any narrative feature is going to be purely the experience of the writer and would never guarantee you’ll have the same time.
The only objective travel piece is a factual round with lists of facilities and addresses!
Also travel pieces are unusual territory because it may not be there to inform so much as entertain or be aspirational. I’ve had ‘swaying palms’ and ‘palm’fringed beaches’ subbed into my copy because that’s what those mag readers wanted to hear (allegedly!)
All this makes the money issue less important. But for the record, not all trips are paid for. I tend to do a mix of comped press trips (where there is a 'travelled as a guest of...' line included); self-generated ideas where I'll ask for a press reduction (completely unaffordable otherwise, with commercial link plugs) or my own paid-for visits (plugs more generalised not just holiday company or airline). The links or factboxes signal to readers what has gone on – and they can pick up a lot from the tone and content of the article.
Some companies won't allow comped features - esp in the US. You’d have to be rich indeed to continue working this way though!
In the UK, journalists deal with the ethics in different ways - from maintaining brutal honesty (readers comes first), to softening any issues that occur to just not writing up the bad stuff (especially if it's a one-off). I think most travel journos would not mislead a reader if there was a genuine issue they should know about.
The real problem is that on such trips the itinerary is laid out so you often only get to see what you are taken to see. Still it's usually possible to sneak off for your own view or to do your research in advance and address any issues in the piece.
Surely the same ethical question applies to all reviews, though? Journalists and their publishers don't, in general, pay for the things they review. Movie critics don't pay for tickets to the films they write about - they get sent to press screenings. I rather doubt that the writers for hi-fi magazines go out and spend tens of thousands of pounds of their (or their publisher's) cash on new stereo equipment every month, and so on.
I'm not sure I see what makes travel journalism different to any of these, at least in principle?
It varies wildly - restaurant reviewers will almost always pay for the meal the review, as will hotel reviewers.
However, there is a qualitative difference between, say HiFi reviewing, where you have to give the goods back after you're done, and travel writing, where you get the whole experience. Also, in theatre and film reviewing, you'll be seeing the majority of the output in that field, and won't be picking and choosing. With travel, the time implications mean you'll be making a choice, and will tend to be choosing the ones you are more inclined to like, surely?
From a B2B perspective (I work on Travel Weekly), we write for travel agents and we aim to provide them with information that will help sell holidays.
Tour operators and destinations pay for trips and we are explicit about that. We also attend fam trips with agents whuch are provided by operators - again it is explicit who has provided the trip.
We also have supplements and web pages that are sponsored by destinations/operators.
For the audience it is of value to know who has put on the trip to understand their product and which resorts they go to etc.
In the consumer media space I think journalists need to be transparent on who sent them - could there actually be some value in sharing this?
My interest is actually the disruptive effect of social media on travel journalism.
Tripadvisor and travel communities have become hugely important for anyone taking a holiday - whatever any journalist might write, the consumer is increasingly interested in recommendation and knowledge/experience sharing.
Throw into the mix the use of video (of hotels etc), pictures, audio, maps and blogs and you have an incredibly rich source of destination information.
Our own sales tool - Gazetteers.com - provides independent resort reviews (as well as operator info etc) but what has been interesting here is that agents themselves have added nearly 10,000 reviews. This demonstrates the power of recommendation.
I'd go a step further than the ethics issue. The real challenge for travel journalsists, like counterparts in other sectors, is what value do they bring?
Transparency, filtering, aggregating, mapping etc - these are what we need to be doing now. This is where journalists can demonstrate their knowledge and expertise (I know this has been said before).
We at Travel Weekly are looking at how we do some of this (Adam mentioned the Postcards blog) and I think we have more to do.
In the meantime, destination marketing is getting more sophisticated and increasingly engaging with social networks - something else travel journalists need to keep an eye on.
@Neil - "The smarter papers ... have realised they can get more insight from people already on the ground"
There's some truth in this but it only addresses the needs of the nationals, and only works for specific markets. It falls down completely in the cruise market, and I suspect it wouldn't work for travel features in e.g. regional papers, women's mags or even the trade press.
@AndyB - good point... but it rests on travel features kinda sorta being objective reviews, and they're never really presented that way to readers. I've yet to see '8/10: Editor's Choice' at the top of a destination write-up :)
What do we think about the distinction between being hosted by an operator (i.e. going to experience a very specific product) and going on a broader tourist board-hosted trip?
Hi Martin
>The real challenge for travel journalsists, like counterparts in other sectors, is what value do they bring?
Well, a good story for a start. People will use socialmedia to gather multiple opinions before they choose where to go - but may read travel articles for entertainment alone. A good writer will weave a good tale, enjoyable in itself and not often found on forums.
There is an overlap between the nature of travel writing as narrative and travel journalism as disseminator of useful information.
Should facts/ethics get in the way of a good story - now there's an age-old question!
Right, stop the discussion - it's all been cleared up by the strapline of US mag Budget Travel's blog:
"You can always trust us — because we never take freebies or accept any travel discounts."
See? Simple as that...
My old ma said never trust a man who says trust me.x
It's been great to see the debate my initial thought on this topic had.
@Nathan's discovery of that strapline "You can always trust us — because we never take freebies or accept any travel discounts." is, I'm sure, how we'd all like to operate. Trouble is that isn't likley in today's cash-strapped newspaper world.
That shouldn't matter if we're all honest about what we find but I still maintain I haven't seen any critical reviews - perhaps that's because all the destinations are so wonderful, there's isn't anything bad to say!
So far I've been contacted by one person who DID do a semi-critical review and I know of another one that went wrong.
Having opened this can of worms I'm now just hoping my trip this weekend doesn't make the point for me.
@Sarah - I guess hotel write ups are slightly different, but re bad reviews the Times carried a breathtaking hatchet job on the Bahrain Banyan Tree a while ago... I'd love to know whether he was being hosted, and by whom.
At the end of the day it comes down to two things: do a decent job, and be explicit about how you did it. People will only complain if you a) hoodwink them, b) write a crap piece, or c) both. Otherwise, as Neil originally said, I suspect they're not too bothered.
I run a travel magazine in Korea and I wrestle with even accepting a 'free lunch' from someone.
I feel as if there's a moral obligation to write something good if they're giving me something for free.
What happens if I really don't like it?
I felt as if there's a moral obligation to write something good if they're giving me something for free.
I am editor of Travolution, sister title of Travel Weekly and colleague of Adam at RBI. We focus on the online travel industry.
Some research (this really is hot off the press) we have conducted this summer for our next edition. These results offers some interesting context to the debate. We polled 2,100 consumers:
Which sources used for destination research:
[Note the first entry]
Travel magazines/supplements - 9%
Online travel agent - 18%
Brochures - 23%
Travel guides - 12%
Tourist board site - 16%
Travel review site (tripadvisor eg) - 24%
Resort-specific site - 28%
Friends/colleagues - 20%
Which sources used for product research:
Operator sites (Virgin Hols eg) - 25%
Travel mags/supps - 7%
Online travel agent - 17%
Google (!) - 28%
Friends/colleagues - 18%
Supplier sites (airline/hotel) - 27%
High Street agent - 8%
Note the influence of press again.
@ Fiona. Totally agree - a good story is what journalists are paid to create. And there is a well defined travel writing discipline and some very good exponents.
What I was trying to touch upon is what Kevin's (he and Adam are colleagues of mine) research demonstrates. That consumers rely less and less on what journalists have to say.
Thanks for sharing these stats, Kev. Very eye-opening and thought-provoking for travel journos. Yikes.
Why am I not more scared by the stats?
Because I'm not sure travel features were ever much of a source for 'destination research'. It's kind of like saying you read real-life stories for info on how to deal with your husband leaving you for your best friend's wife while still on honeymoon.
Step away from the pure research angle of travel!
PS Back to ethics, there is (or was) an NUJ code of conduct for journalists which student journos were trained in. Wonder if it has a section on this kind of thing?
I think you also need to make a distinction between the hosted press trip and a solo freelancer researching a piece with the help of an airline to get him there and a tour operator to fix the ground handling. Press trips suck end of story - they are all about manipulating writers to write what the sponsor(s) want them to write. I stopped freelancing a couple of months ago, but prior to that I was a freelance travel writer for 7 years. But I'd stopped doing press trips years before that. (I loathe PR and the impact it is having upon credible travel writing!) As a freelancer, I used my great contacts with genuinely excellent tour operators that I was more than happy to publicise to come up with really good ideas for features... my ideas, totally exclusive, offered to travel eds I had relationships with who knew my writing. If they commissioned me I got the operator to fix the trip up and asked the airline to give me a seat on the plane... As others have said already, the economics just wouldn't have worked otherwise... But I feel pretty comfortable that the stories I wrote were accurate depictions of the trips I did...
Whilst we're on the subject...
Fancy a debate about crap pay for travel journalism generally? Whose fault is it that we question ethics in this particular arena? Perhaps the publishers who are too tight to pay a decent sum for a feature or to fund trips themselves would like to provide some insight? Travel Weekly pays about £195 per 1000 words I believe - which is shockingly bad - or they did until I stopped writing for them! (Much as I liked the people on their editorial team...)
Not much I can say on that - pay rates are set magazine by magazine here, and that's a different figure to the one I was using as features editor on Estates Gazette a couple of years ago.
There's also been a change of people at the top in TW in recent months. No idea if that's still accurate. Martin may chip in with something later on.
You can't have it both ways though you sound like you've been traumatised by some horrendous PR experience. Presume you contacted the PR at the airline "to give you a seat on the plane" and the tour operator giving you the good ideas for features is doing PR. Like every field, including travel journalists, there are the good, the bad and the ugly.
You make me worry about the delicate minds of travel journalist and how easily they are manipulated....As a tourist board or company of course you want to show your best light. In the same way that you do when you meet your boyfriend's mother. Any journalist worth their salt should be able to handle that and will take that into account. Ultimately readers don't go to the travel pages to read "gritty". It would be interesting to see how long the media would survive without any PR contact whatsoever.
An old thread - but interesting nevertheless. I wonder how travel journalism has evolved over the past 18 months?
To be honest the majority of readers are media literate/savvy these days and will be well aware that most press is clearly geared toward 'tempered PR' pieces about destinations/hotels etc
Most people genuinely interested in regional flavours will go buy a destination book or entertaining travel journal - or if it's inside info about hotels will go to Trip Advisor (though even that is not 100% as we all know that hoteliers now get their receptionists to submit 'favourable reviews' online )
As a music journalist it works somewhat differently for me.
Yes, I get into all my gigs for free and get my downloads gratis - but I write 'straight from the hip' and that varies from luke warm to hot depending solely upon my visceral experience of the gig or CD
PRs/bands seem generally accepting of this rule, and it's never prevented me from getting future invites from PRs.
Part of the equation for me is building a relationship of resepect with the PR (not always, but nearly always possible!) whereby they undersatnd I will write engaging copy - but will be honest about my experiences one way or the other.
It's up to the band to wow me - not the press release!
I'm guessing the more the financial outlay for a PR company (ie exotic destinations) - the more uncomfortable the deal for both journalist and provider.
C'est la vie, Huh?