FEATURING: JAKE SILLAVAN | VISIT FRISCO DIGITAL MARKETING MANAGER
The February 14th mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida reignited a heated debate on gun control in the United States. It also demonstrated once again the need for destination organizations to have a crisis management plan. From city officials urging gun rights advocates to relocate meetings, to activists calling for boycotts of destinations, our industry continues to be impacted by political conversations and legislation.
We invite you to read our latest political threat analysis, The Shifting Conversation on Gun Control and How it May Affect Destinations, where we examine the rapidly changing conversation in wake of the Florida shooting and how it affects our industry and address what the growing trend in consumer boycotts means for destination organizations.
See below for a statement put out by the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA):
A former employee of Cambridge Analytica and its parent company SCL revealed the unauthorized use of roughly 50 million Facebook users’ data to fulfill their clients’ political agendas. Articles in international media refer to the role the employee and his former Victoria-based colleague played in setting up the Canadian firm AIQ to serve Cambridge Analytica.
The unethical practices by Cambridge Analytica and others are salient and disconcerting, but one has to wonder if they are only the tip of the iceberg. The combination of social media, AI, big data, and the ever-evolving technological landscape is presenting opportunities like never before, but not always for the better. The issue of “data ethics” and privacy will likely be the source of considerable public and media scrutiny for the foreseeable future. So what can companies in the field of big data and insights do to protect their brands and ensure they have the public trust?
Honesty, professional responsibility, transparency, data protection, and privacy are central to the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA) Code of Conduct. MRIA is Canada’s professional association for standards, advocacy, and certification in marketing research, public opinion research, and insights. The actions of Cambridge Analytica and AIQ would have been clear and flagrant violations of MRIA’s Code, had they been members.
MRIA has a Code of Conduct that addresses ethics, privacy, and protection of both participants’ rights and information. The MRIA Charter of Respondent Rights puts the priority of the respondent above all others. Technology has changed the speed, quantity, and quality of data gathering. Consumers today are often unaware that their data are collected and how the information is used. However, the principles of ethics and integrity remain constant for the MRIA. The ethical principles to maintain public confidence and integrity in work produced by MRIA members are not a choice; they are the standard they must follow. Unethical behaviour by one has an impact on every agency or organization that uses participants’ data.
Members of the MRIA are intended to uphold ethical behaviour and practice, and they are not only held accountable by their peers, but also data collection agencies are regularly audited to ensure they follow the standards. Clients who commission marketing research studies have a vital interest in ensuring that there is integrity in the collection and release of research studies because we are all dependent on the public to provide the insights and to consume our products. The reputation of marketing research firms and their clients is a priceless asset that takes years to earn, and one ethical lapse can squander this invaluable asset in the blink of an eye.
The MRIA and its sister organizations globally are gravely concerned. We support the positions taken by associations representing the profession in Europe, ESOMAR, and the United States Insights Association.
Members of the public are justified in being angry and concerned. Research firms, insight practitioners, clients and media who use marketing research, and giant social media firms that gather and hold millions of personally-identifiable profiles must take notice and act responsibly.
As the standard bearers of professional integrity in the self-regulating field of research and insights, the MRIA is calling on all stakeholders to work together in protecting the public’s interest. It is vital that ethics be the top priority in this new era of big data; the wild west attitude that led—and perhaps even encouraged—the actions by Cambridge Analytica must become a thing of the past, lest it continue to erode public trust.
VICTORIA, British Columbia — The tsunami warning was a nice touch.
On the first day that delegates opened discussions about tourism and climate change, planet Earth responded with a jolt. Shortly after midnight, sirens blared and cellphones rang across Vancouver Island: WARNING — TSUNAMI: Prepare to evacuate.
The waves from an Alaskan earthquake never materialized, but Canada’s first national sustainable tourism conference felt both cursed and blessed.
Deirdre Campbell, of Beattie Tartan Communications and a conference founder, joked the next morning, “No, we didn’t plan this, but it made the point.”
To wit, Canada made the unusual decision to tackle tourism’s toughest problems while their industry is on the upswing, when life is good.
In fact, Canada tourism has never been hotter. The “good news” headlines are becoming repetitive:
“Best Year Ever for Canada Tourism — 2017 surpassing the previous record by over one million.”
“Toronto breaks all records with $8.8 billion in tourism receipts.”
So why not use this golden era to enact painful measures to mitigate the effects of climate change and the degradation of wilderness or to tackle overtourism, even if it reduces the number of tourists. The last panel was titled “When More Isn’t Better.”
The three-day Impact Sustainability Travel and Tourism Conference was a serious affair, bringing together Canada’s minister of tourism, members of Parliament, provincial officials, mayors and scientists, along with representatives of the tourism industry, including the head of Destination Canada.
Every other speaker warned that tourism could no longer be deemed successful simply by counting the high numbers of visitors and money they spend.
This city, the site of the conference, was ranked the No. 2 small city in the world by Conde Nast Traveler last year, an acknowledgement of its revived harbor, exotic foodie scene, its fancied-up, English-flavored architecture and the newer totem poles rising around the city.
“We’ve had great growth that is already fueling unsustainability,” said mayor Lisa Helps. “Our goal has to be saving the world, one destination at a time.”
That rhetoric flowed into working sessions in which attendees tried to connect the dots. Everything was open for discussion except one item. David Butler, director of sustainability for Canadian Mountain Holidays, said, “I presume there is no one in the room who doesn’t believe climate change is happening and is caused by human behavior.”
More than a few heads turned toward me, the only American speaker, and I nodded, assuring them I was not a denier.
It was an eye-opening moment to be in Canada talking tourism. Having grown up in Seattle and often trekking to Vancouver and back, I never considered Canada foreign. Now, though, the contrast with the U.S. couldn’t be greater.
Back in Washington, the American tourism industry had raised a different alarm: International visitors were turning away from the U.S. The slide began in 2015 and went into overdrive with the election of Donald Trump.
During Trump’s first year as president, international tourism to the U.S. dropped 3.3%. That translates into a loss of $4.6 billion in revenue and 40,000 jobs.
So the U.S. tourism industry unveiled the Visit U.S. Coalition, an old-school attempt to lure back foreign tourists with inspiring videos portraying the cultural diversity of the U.S.
Coalition members said they were not blaming Trump. It’s the strong dollar as well as mixed messages that have turned off foreigners, who need to be reassured that the U.S. remains a welcoming country in spite of new security and visa policies that might be confusing.
Yet the U.S. Travel Association was among the first to warn that Trump’s proposed Muslim immigration ban “had a broad, chilling effect on demand for international travel to the United States.” Since then other tourism experts have tracked monthly drops in foreign visitors with the president’s disparaging remarks about nations and religions, specifically a sharp drop from Middle Eastern countries and Mexico. Also in the mix is fear of gun violence: Travel warnings by foreign governments about the U.S. have increased with the rise in mass shootings.
Preventing a deeper slide in the visitor numbers tops the U.S. travel industry’s priorities. Yet any discussion of sustainable tourism in the age of climate change is off the table. Trump has pulled out of the Paris climate accord, and sustainability is not a goal.
Canada is looking ahead; the U.S. is treading water.
All of which made the Canadian conference more intriguing. What does it look like when the tourism industry joins government in an attempt to come clean, admit what they’re doing wrong and figure out how they might fix things?
First, by admitting that tourism is a miniscule piece of an enormous global problem but nonetheless has its role in either mitigating or encouraging more damage.
Next, the conference invited everyone from across Canada, regardless of political party or philosophy. The primary goal was to connect the dots from unique points of view. How do the summer wildfires in British Columbia and the melting ice in Manitoba and rising sea ice in the Northwest Passage reflect harmful effects of climate change? Then how are they mitigating those problems and still maintaining a healthy tourism industry?
At this stage, most answers were short-term solutions.
• In the mountains of British Columbia, wildlife are herded to new wild pastures away from the flames while underbrush is cut to reduce the spread of fires near structures.
“There is no question we are seeing weather extremes, and our insurance companies are asking how we are preparing,” Butler said of mountain holidays.
• Manitoba employs tourist buggies that travel lightly on the tundra and, in collaboration with Polar Bears International, at least one of those buggies is outfitted with scientific equipment to track and study polar bears.
• The vast Nunavut territory has limited the size of cruise ships to no more than 500 passengers.
“We know we are facing climate change,” said Nancy Guyon of the government of Nunavut. “We have to keep the number of visitors down and follow a comprehensive compact to protect the land, the wildlife and the environment.”
Experts offered simple solutions to chip away at complex problems. They went into great detail about technical problems such as “decarbonizing” travel whether by air, land or sea and inexpensive ways to recycle waste. To eliminate the deadly accumulation of plastic-contaminated rivers, lakes and oceans, a popular first step was getting rid of plastic straws. Tourism could join with community campaigns across Canada to prohibit the use of plastic straws that eventually travel to the sea, polluting the water and killing sea life.
The pithiest slogan was “straws suck.” Goodbye sleek, red straws with evening cocktails.
The Canadian tourism industry, with its whale-watching on both coasts and adventure journeys writ large, never questioned that it had a big stake in helping to keep Canada’s waters clean.
Still, this was a tourism conference, and some of the presentations resembled those of any other gathering of destination promoters. They showed lavish videos: northern lights, high-end meals in hipster venues and — the big crowd-pleaser — mother polar bears tending to their cubs.
At other times, it felt like a prelude to the climate conference in Paris. Darren Reeder, executive director of the Banff & Lake Louise Hospitality Association, reported with pride that he had reduced the number of overflow visitors at Banff National Park and was completing details of a plan to reduce the number of cars.
Alex Berlyand, a young entrepreneur, offered an answer. He co-founded Parkbus, a nonprofit service from Toronto to provincial parks that transports city dwellers to the great outdoors for as little as $40 each — low carbon with high value for society and the environment.
The scientist Robert William Sandford of the United Nations University Institute was the voice of doom, at first. His whole life is climate change, and in addressing this tourism conference he warned that the heady days of cheap go-anywhere-anytime air travel could be gone in a few decades as the climate deteriorates.
But he followed this with small-step solutions any of the agencies could follow, ending with an appeal to carrying on with “the hard work of hope,” which is also the name of a book he authored.
The essential goal of the conference was to encourage delegates to define what the tourism industry believes is worth sustaining in their destinations or regions.
“What is the value of a wetland?” asked Michelle Molnar, an environmental economist from the David Suzuki Foundation. “Is that worth sustaining? Yes.”
Mayor Helps pointed to the Munro bookstore in downtown Victoria, initially started by Alice Munro, Canada’s Nobel Laureate in Literature, as an example of sustaining a city’s culture.
In that discussion, one aspect stood out as especially Canadian: an emphasis on indigenous or native tourism.
Native tourism has jumped from a small niche to a major draw, especially in western Canada where it attracts some of the wealthiest tourists interested in authentic culture. The Haida Gwaii islands of British Columbia are the crown jewel of the native destinations. The evocative archipelago was returned to largely native control after multiple lawsuits, and two of its islands are now a Unesco World Heritage Site.
That has caught the attention of the government as well as environmentalists, who have generally supported indigenous tourism groups in protecting and preserving natural resources in the face of demands of extractive industries, especially lumber.
Canada’s tourism minister, Bardish Chagger, used the conference to announce a $1.7 million federal grant for indigenous tourism in British Columbia. It satisfied both the demands of the continuing Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada to make amends with indigenous peoples and the view that tourism is a natural fit for reviving indigenous culture while creating profitable businesses.
“We’re long past being tokens on a guided tour,” said Keith Henry, CEO of Indigenous Tourism Canada and co-chairman of the conference. Indigenous peoples, he said “are Canada, and Canada isn’t a young country. It is far older than 150 years. It is an ancient civilization, like Egypt.”
There was an undercurrent, rarely mentioned in public, about the direction of U.S. tourism. Friction between Ottawa and Washington over renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement and border issues has filtered down to tourism. Canada is seeing an uptick in Mexican tourists, while Americans seem more wary of visiting.
There was no gratuitous sniping at Americans — in fact, just the opposite. Elizabeth May, a feisty leader of Canada’s Green Party and member of Parliament, said fewer Americans are visiting Canada, and she missed them.
“We can’t allow you to be insular and isolated,” she said to applause. “We love you. We welcome you with open arms.”
Again, several heads turned toward me. I smiled.
Photo: Deirdre Campbell of Beattie Tartan Communications, a conference founder, addresses attendees after a tsunami warning.
Photo Credit: Impact Tourism
The deadline for compliance with the European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is just around the corner, and even if you’re a U.S.-based DMO, the privacy law WILL apply to you. Since you’re most likely collecting personal data in your CRM and CMS from customers or contacts in the EU, it is important to educate yourself and your team on GDPR requirements, and to review and adjust your policies and processes as needed to make sure you’re lawfully handling the data.
Don’t Get Scared, Get Prepared
It can be easy to feel intimidated or overwhelmed by the requirements of this new regulation, so we’d like to help you ease into what you need to know with this blog: build your awareness of the regulation, give you some key points to keep in mind, and some questions to start you off on reviewing your policies and processes for compliance. At the end of this blog, we’ll provide some further resources for you.
What GDPR Means to Destination Organizations
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (Regulation (EU) 2016/679) is a regulation by which the European Parliament, the European Council, and the European Commission intend to strengthen and unify data protection for individuals within the European Union (EU).
This means if you have any customers or contacts in the EU—and as a destination marketing organization, you probably do—how you gather information for marketing communications and how you use that information will need to be addressed and adjusted to be in compliance with GDPR. You need to ensure you’re in compliance by the stated deadline of May 25, 2018. If you’re not, you could face some hefty fines. But don’t get scared, get prepared.
Key Points for Destination Organizations to Keep in Mind
- Consent for data collection and storage: For any data you collect on an individual residing in the EU, you must have consent to collect that data and store it, and you must be able to prove that consent. Consent must be active—affirmative action by the data subject, i.e “opting in”—not passive, i.e. acceptance through pre-ticked boxes or opt-outs. You must clearly state your purpose for collecting the information, meaning how it will specifically be used. Ask yourself: Can we describe data-collection practices as transparent?
- Individual rights to data review, portability, and erasure: An EU resident can request to review and even have you delete/erase their data. You need to be able to show the data you’ve collected on an individual to that individual upon request (free of charge), within thirty days of the request, and if he or she wants their data deleted, you must be able to do this within a reasonable amount of time. A data controller must communicate to other organizations the need to delete copies of this data and links to those copies. Ask yourself: Are there clear, documented procedures in place for dealing with such requests?
- Data controllers AND processors are held responsible: A controller is defined as the person, public authority, or agency who determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data. In our world, DMOs or marketing agencies can be considered controllers. A processor is a person, public authority, or agency which processes personal data on behalf of the controller. Simpleview, for example, can be a data processor. Unlike under the previous directive, both controllers of data AND processors of data are held accountable by GDPR, and there are fines for non-compliance, starting May 25, 2018. Be sure you’re in compliance, and review that your partners are compliant as well.
- No data is grandfathered in: You must be able to show consent for any data you currently have on EU individuals, even date collected prior to the GDPR deadline. If you can’t, you need to request consent before the deadline, or delete the information. DO NOT send communication out to previously unsubscribed emails. Ask yourself: For current customers, can we demonstrate an existing customer relationship? For email subscribers, do we have records that demonstrate consent?
- Timely breach notifications: GDPR makes it compulsory to notify both users and data protection authorities within 72 hours of discovering a security breach. In some cases, affected individuals need to be notified, as well. Ask yourself: Are my current systems set up to identify a breach? Do we have a data security and data breach policy?
- Non-compliance fines: Companies can be fined up to €20MM, 23MM (USD) or 4% of their global annual turnover of the preceding financial year (whichever is higher). Other consequences could include personal damage claims, a damaged reputation, and loss of business to compliant competitors. So, there is pretty much no question that GDPR compliance is not only to the benefit of your EU customers and contacts, but also to your organization. Your customers, no matter where they reside, want to know they can trust you with their business and their personal information. Show them that they can.
More reasons the Work is Worth it
While putting in the work to ensure compliance with this new regulation may seem taxing right now, keep in mind that the steps you take to be in compliance, and to maintain compliance for your EU customers, are beneficial to your DMO as a whole, as well. At Simpleview, we stress the importance of clean data to a highly efficient CRM and CMS. We promote marketing to your visitors with content relevant to them, to increase the likelihood of engagement and conversion. We encourage working with and trusting your partners and members through the use of integrated technology and services. All of these best practices can only be strengthened by cleaning up your data by ensuring the individuals you are marketing to consented to receive information from you, and that both parties, you and the customer, are clear on what you’ll be marketing—that it will be relevant. Additionally, having policies and processes in place will document and illustrate trust and minimize misunderstandings, as will being aware that your partners are putting in the work to show they know trust is important, too.
Visit Simpleview’s GDPR landing page for more resources on compliance, including a GDPR Readiness Assessment, FAQs, and more.
Please note this blog and its content, as well as the additional guidance/resource documents, are not exhaustive resources on GDPR policy and they should not be relied on as legal advice. Because legal information is not the same as legal advice – the application of law to one’s specific circumstances, we recommend consulting a lawyer if you need legal advice on how to interpret the legislation. This content is information for awareness purposes and to inspire you to review your current policies and practices.
A look at international tourism trends on the back of a possible ‘Trump slump’
While the U.S. still makes up a sizable chunk of world travel, new data measuring 2017’s first seven months of international travel to the U.S. from the U.S. Commerce Department indicates a dip of 4 percent year-over-year.
The gut reaction, of course, is to point to a “Trump slump.” But what are the major influencers on international travel from an academic point of view?
Curious, we reached out to Robert Li, Director of the U.S.-Asia Center for Tourism & Hospitality Research and professor in the Department of Tourism and Hospitality Management at Temple University, for some insight.
The data, coming out of Davos, shows a decrease in international travel to the U.S. in 2017–after already losing travelers in 2016. And, mostly, [the common narrative attributes this] to a “Trump slump.” But does politics have this kind of effect on other countries’ tourism industries, or is this a uniquely American problem?
- The world is full of questions that deserve answers no matter how embarrassed, time-crunched or intimidated we are to ask. With Infrequently Asked Questions, we set out to answer those shared curiosities. Have a question you want answered? Send an email to email@example.com, and we’ll find an expert who can give you the answer you’re craving.
As a general observation, tourism is a fairly fragile industry, vulnerable to all different kinds of external impacts, including political issues. We have seen numerous examples where a negative political climate or controversial message caused a decrease in tourist arrivals.
Why do you think it is that the United States’ viability as a destination [might be] reliant on, say, who is president rather than what national parks or cultural amenities we have? This isn’t a new problem–George W. Bush infamously had a horrible international reputation.
I don’t necessarily agree with that assumption. I believe all of these [factors]–from visitor-friendly policies to natural and cultural resources–are important. Or, at least, I have not seen any studies showing which is more important. And they are all part of a country’s destination image, which ultimately determines our appeal to international tourists.
With that said, presidents’ and politicians’ support are crucial to the prosperity of tourism. The Obama administration was quite supportive of tourism–e.g., the Travel Promotion Act was signed into law in 2010, which created Brand USA, the country’s national destination marketing organization. And more countries joined the visa waiver program, etc. The number of international travelers entering the U.S. each year between 2009 and 2016 grew by more than 40 percent, which I believe was not a coincidence.
Are there other moments in history when politics or current affairs might’ve influenced travel?
The U.S. travel industry is no stranger to downturns, most notably the remarkable impacts of 9/11 on U.S. tourism.
The ‘IAQ’ Fast Facts
• The link between politics and travel is, from a data standpoint, tenuous. But there is some indication of a connection between current affairs and travel–see: 9/11.
• Between 2009 and 2016, international travel to the U.S. increased by 40 percent.
• U.S. cities, specifically New York and Los Angeles, are working overtime to remind international travelers that the U.S. is open to everyone.
• China has emerged as the U.S.’ No. 1 source market for tourism spending.
Does the hospitality industry, at-large, have any kind of cohesive messaging for persuading international travelers to come here? Is there any tangible advertising or messaging happening in other countries, and how is it decided what countries to advertise to if so?
I believe the American travel industry is putting great efforts to tell the world that this country continues welcoming international tourists from all over the world. After all, diversity and hospitality are part of this country’s identity.
Last October, in the Market Outlook Forum, an annual industry get-together discussing the latest trends and issues in tourism, we heard a great deal of discussion on this.
Several destinations have taken actions on this. After all, diversity and hospitality are part of the defining characteristics of this country. For instance, New York recently launched a campaign designed to “counter negative rhetoric and remind the world that New York City is open for business.” The campaign slogan is “New York City — Welcoming the World.” Los Angeles’ new ad campaign has a tagline for tourism: “Everyone is welcome.” They target people who are looking for a very authentic experience.
What are some usual deterrents for folks traveling to a country? Security? Ease of transportation?
- MORE INFREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
- Do we spend more money when the weather’s bad?
- Should I care about Bitcoin?
- Why do banks close so early?
There are many potential travel constraints, such as financial issues, e.g., unfavorable exchange rates; lack of accessibility, including visa policy, international direct flight, language barriers, in-country transportation, etc.; distance that’s geographic or cultural; natural disasters, etc.
Safety and security are almost always the No. 1 priority for tourists. This could range from conflicts and corruption, terrorism, hostility, to war.
What country has the largest number of visitors to the U.S.? Has that changed much through the years? What are people typically traveling here for, in terms of attractions?
Canada is the U.S.’ No. 1 source market in terms of visitation or number of visitors.
The most notable change in recent years is China’s rapid rise as a key source market. China is now the country’s No. 1 source market in terms of tourism spending.
The National Travel and Tourism Office releases statistics on this. It appears, as of July 2017, most countries in the U.S.’ Top 20 source markets have seen a decline.
Destinations and attractions tourists visit vary substantially among countries. But international tourists, particularly first-timers, usually like the iconic attractions, from the Statue of Liberty to Yellowstone, from Independence Hall to Disney.
Anything you would like to add?
Tourism is not just important for the tourism industry. Considering the ripple effect of international tourist spending, tourism has profound impacts on our society’s economic and socio-cultural well-being.
Globally, international tourism is growing fast, and many countries are stepping up their game in tourism competition–see: Australia’s Super Bowl ads for one example. It is indeed disquieting that the U.S. is now facing a very sharp drop in foreign travelers.