Should cultural tourism be limited to luxury tourists?

It is indeed a provocative question with uncomfortable answers. By its very nature, cultural tourism is potentially the most beneficial form of tourism toward understanding cultural differences and consequently promote social harmony. So it should be encouraged and facilitated to reach the largest audience. That is the bright side of the idea. The downside of cultural tourism is the “observer effect” where the subjects are affected by the mere presence of the observers. As cultural tourism become increasingly popular so does the increasing effect on the culture being observed altering its nature and diminishing its value.

The easy way to get nowhere in social media!

It does not quite work that way in social media

So you decided it was about time to get serious about promoting your hotel or other tourism business through social media. You already had a page in Facebook, a Twitter account and Instagram for pretty pictures. Needless to say the sixty some likes on Facebook and the hundred or so followers on Twitter have done absolutely nothing for you, probably worse, they made you look like you are asleep or that you don’t really care, although you probably did not yet understood the downside of looking asleep on social media.

The price of cultural tourism

Angkor Wat 1880.

The attraction of cultural tourism is its uniqueness and, most often, its scarcity. It is precisely because a historical monument or a cultural tradition is unique and only found in one place that cultural tourism exist: one must go there to experience the culture. Unlike attraction parks that can be replicated anywhere to meet market demand and spread the traffic, cultural destinations cannot duplicate themselves and cannot expand without compromising or diluting some aspects of their cultural value. Where is the fair and ethical line between preserving virgin state and meeting demand?

Where is the future of travel agents?

A dead-end or a detour?

There is a great debate about the future of travel agents as it has become easier, faster and cheaper for consumers to buy their travel online. While the debate focuses on what can traditional travel agents can do to compete with OTA (Online Travel Agents) and survive in the industry, both are facing the same problem in the long-term: the declining perceived value of their services, the specialized information from which they derive their revenue, as that information becomes increasingly more localized, relevant and current on the Internet. Viewed from that angle, OTA are actually worse off than traditional travel agents as they compete within the same realm than the free specialized information lives in, while the traditional agents retain the advantage of the personal contact dimension with customers. But traditional travel agents face another problem: as there is nothing to physically deliver to the customer any more as tickets, hotel bookings and travel insurance contracts are all delivered electronically, there is no compelling reason for the customer to visit their store or office.