Showing posts with label media coverage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media coverage. Show all posts
The history of dark tourism: from Roman gladiator spectacles to contemporary conflict zone tours
Dark tourism is not new, as my readers (whose insightful comments always inspire further reflection) point out: Travel Muse recalls touring German war sites as a teenager, while Sandy suggests that The Crusades, which revolved around a fascination with the macabre, might also have been an early version of dark tourism. Indeed, the thesis of 'Guided by the dark: from thanatopsis to thanatourism', published in 1996 by A V Seaton, is that death is the one heritage that everyone shares and therefore has been an element of tourism longer than any other form of heritage. (Thanatourism is generally described as the desire for actual or symbolic encounters with death.) The nobility watched the 1815 Battle of Waterloo from a safe distance, while one of the American Civil War sites (Manassas) was immediately marketed as a tourist attraction after the war ended, according to UK scholar John Lennon in Journeys into Understanding in The Observer (2005). Indeed, the Auschwitz-Birkenaz concentration camp museum and memorial (pictured) was established in 1947, less than two years after the Red Army troops arrived in 1945 and found 7,000 emaciated prisoners there; it now receives nearly a million visitors a year. Debbie Lisle in 'Defending Voyeurism: Dark Tourism and the Problem of Global Security' (in Peter M Burns and Marina Novelli's Tourism and politics: global frameworks and local realities, 2007) argues that historical spectacles such as Roman gladiator matches and public hangings were also forms of dark tourism, and that the phenomenon also takes in sites of celebrity deaths, such as the site of JFK's assassination in Dallas and the site of Diana's death in Paris, as well as tours to modern conflict zones, from Bosnia to Mogadishu. It was just recently that tourists visited Iraq for the first time since 2003, starting with an independent traveller (see Fallujah's Strange Visitor: a Western Tourist in the New York Times) in February 2009, followed by a group of package tourists (see I took a picture to show my dentist in The Guardian, 21 March 2009). It's interesting to note that the group didn't consider themselves to be 'war tourists', claiming they were there for the history and culture, despite visiting places that are still very dangerous, such as Mosul, while the Italian independent traveller simply seemed naive. Neither the Iraqis nor Italian officials nor American marines interviewed for the story thought Iraq was ready for tourists yet.
The Dark Side of Journalism
A debate over the Hari article and other Dubai-bashing stories, such as a recent piece in the Toronto Star titled 'Dubai how not to build a city' (this one in the whole "city of superlatives" sub-genre, and equally as bad as Hari's, laced with just as many cliches and factual and historical errors) is raging in the blogosphere, particularly on UAE blogs such as Grape Shisha, who posts about the Toronto story; Secret Dubai Diary (a blogger who surprisingly liked Hari's piece); and the UAE Community Blog, where SamuraiSam posts a hilarious piece titled Dark Side, in which he writes: "Dear international media, You need to write more articles that reference the 'dark side of Dubai', there are clearly not enough." Sam links to 12 articles, including stories by the BBC, The Guardian, ABC News, The Times, Time, and Bloomberg, which all use the 'Dark Side' in their melodramatic headlines. This is exactly why I thought Hari's piece was a parody. There's the 'Dark side of the Dubai dream', the 'Dark Side of Dubai's Boomtown', the Dark side of Dubai’s economic boom..., Carole Cadwalladr explores the dark side of Dubai, and - my favorite - 'The Dark Side of Splendor." What about 'The Dark Side of Journalism'?Terry has written a particularly fine post on the subject (his last), 'This is my last Dubai goodbye', over at his blog Wide Angles Wine & Wanderlust. Do take a read.
Looking at the bright side of Dubai
The story 'The Dark Side of Dubai' apparently wasn't the parody I had hoped it to be, however, while I was disappointed to see The Independent (a paper I have written for before - on Dubai) print such an appalling piece, I'm pleased to see that in an effort to provide some balance they have printed Emirati columnist Sultan Sooud Al Qassemi's 'If you think Dubai is bad, just look at your own country' (although Dubai of course is not a country, it's a city-state or emirate). Also see the reprint of the story at The Huffington Post just to read the articulate comment from SAS. You might also want to read Al Qassemi's piece 'Looking at the bright side of Dubai' in Arabian Business. The British government's response to Hari's piece, the BBC's recent Panorama story on Dubai, and a slew of other stories, is also interesting - read 'UK Government distances itself from Dubai criticism', the result of a Foreign Office-organized press conference in Dubai, which has appeared in a number of publications. It will be fascinating to see if the debate continues in the media, especially the news media. We all know media organizations have agendas. Editors carefully weigh up whether and how to run with stories. Essays like Hari's don't slip in accidentally. So it will be interesting to see if and how this discourse impacts the travel media where advertising plays a powerful and pivotal role. Airlines like Emirates and Etihad spend huge dollars on advertising.
"More to Dubai than Glamour Alone": when an answer becomes a story
I find it curious how reporters work sometimes. I answered a few questions last week for a reporter who was writing a story on Dubai for a travel news syndication site that produces 'news' stories that are then picked up (or not) by their subscribers. Although I answered just a couple of questions from a long list of questions I suggested were better directed toward a Dubai Tourism spokesperson and a real estate expert, a brief part of one of my responses in effect became the story. So far it's appeared on a travel insurance website (take a look here at: More to Dubai than Glamour Alone). What I find odd is that the suggestion was that my answers would contribute to a much larger story but instead they became the story. Which leads me to wonder... was there ever a 'story' in the first place? Or had the reporter's editor just directed the writer to come up with a story on Dubai, any story on Dubai? Which explains the odd combination of questions directed to me. Or perhaps there was an idea for some kind of story initially but because the writer couldn't find anyone else to comment, my quote simply became the story. What do you think?
Ausssie Aussie Aussie! Arrested Arrested Arrested!
Read Terry's take on yet another racist and sensationlist story on Dubai today over at Wide angles, wine and wanderlust. The Australian media's abysmal coverage on Dubai has stooped to new lows today where a so-called 'investigative' journalist writing for The Age newspaper demonstrates that in the eyes of the Aussie media Dubai is clearly the guilty party after its arrest of Aussies over alleged dodgy property dealings in the city-emirate. I've never read such over-hyped and trashy 'reporting' before. Somebody clearly needs to go back to journalism school. I love the opening: A vision of gleaming new cities in the desert has proved to be a mirage for Australians lured by Middle East riches. Um, not all Australians, thank you very much. On both accounts. Since we moved to the UAE in 1998, we've not seen one mirage, but nor were we "lured by Middle East riches" in the first place. For those of us who came for the cultural experience and quality of life, Dubai has delivered in spades. The Sydney Morning Herald (sister-newspaper to The Age) is no better, with slightly edited story of the beat-up. What I love about this 'report' is the suggestion that 'the Sheikh' (assuming they're implying Sheikh Mohammed) is involved in these shonky dealings. If I was a certain Sheikh I know who I'd be suing. Anyway, take a look at Terry's post...
Once upon a time in Dubai: when the fairy tale doesn't unfold (or get told) the way they wanted it to, Or, Why the media needs to grow up
"A couple of years ago when I first started reading travel articles about all the new develop- ments in Dubai, I could never have guessed that this would happen," Erica from Blissful Travel wrote in response to my post on Dubai yesterday, which was actually a pointer to Terry's post on Dubai's Global Reporting Meltdown over at Wide angles, wine and wanderlust, so read that first. I spontaneously began my response to Erica this morning with "I couldn't have imagined it either... unless perhaps I'd given it some serious thought..." So I did give it some thought...This should probably begin with "Once upon a time..." Because I'm thinking this is a bit of a fairytale, a rags-to-riches story. Well, that's how The Media likes to make it out. Or rather have it play out. You see, in the beginning Dubai was a media darling. She was Cinderella after her makeover at the ball. Or - because I should use a more contemporary analogy - she was like the beautiful young starlet who suddenly appears on the Hollywood scene. She gives an okay performance in an indie film, but she's attractive and has charisma. She wears the glammest dress and most gorgeous gems to the ball, or rather, the Oscars, and all of a sudden she's in the spotlight. Everyone's talking about her. And The Media starts writing about her. Everybody catches on and suddenly she's everywhere. She's on every talk show, every gossip site, in every magazine. Life couldn't be more perfect for this rising star. Who wouldn't want this much attention? Everyone wants to be her, to be with her, to live her glamorous lifestyle, to feel part of her 'in' crowd. But then she makes a mistake or two... a bad dress choice or movie role, a bad boyfriend? And then she really messes-up in their eyes... perhaps a racial slur? Filmed taking drugs? Or worse, in a none-too-flattering position in a park (or at a beach?) without clothes on? But the starlet doesn't care. She was an indie film goddess to begin with after all. She fascinated and intrigued long ago - even if it was just her friends and family. So then, The Media turns on her, her fans (who never really knew her anyway) turn on her. They're all against her now and are gleefully showing her at her worse, and printing all those bad hair days. The thing is... there's a career and a livelihood at stake here. So what will the starlet do next? Is an image makeover in order? Or does she need to prove that she can really perform? (Because her family and friends know she can shine.) Should she even care? SohHow do you think this story is going to play out? Because we know we're nowhere near an ending yet...