Junketing gets wired
By David Shapiro
While I was off on a modest vacation I paid for myself, I was interested to read in the Pacific Business News how a bunch of bloggers and social media types from the Mainland were here on a free Hawai'i vacation compliments of the Hawai'i Tourism Authority.
I don't have the marketing expertise to say whether the $15,000 paid by HTA on the So Much More Hawai'i junkets was worthwhile in terms of attracting visitors to Hawai'i.
But the new media folks accepting the freebies were a throwback to the bad old days of journalism when favorable coverage was for sale at the right price.
One of the participating bloggers, Sheila Scarborough. described the junket as "kind of a big deal ... in the fight for the legitimacy of bloggers and wired writers/photographers/videographers as information sources," which struck me as kind of a perverse way to look at it — seeking legitimacy by sidestepping legitimate ethics.
Just because HTA didn't explicitly ask participants to report positively doesn't mean tourism officials weren't careful to pick junketeers it was pretty sure would write what they wanted.
Reputable media long ago adopted ethics codes that barred such freebies because they tainted the objectivity and credibility of our reports; if a writer encourages you buy an expensive vacation, you want to know that he or she independently found it to be a good value and wasn't compensated to say good things.
But such fundamental ethics haven't fully taken hold in the new media that are thriving as the traditional press struggles.
Those active in the social media such as Facebook and Twitter have daily encounters with what Hawai'i-born tech celebrity Guy Kawasaki calls "smores" — social media whores who relentlessly solicit you to "friend" and "follow" them.
It's a bit troubling that they're not above cashing in on the "friends" they amass to score a free trip to Hawai'i.
The appeal of the Internet is that it puts copious amounts of information at our fingertips; the trick has always been to sort out which of it you can believe, and this sort of thing doesn't make it easy.
Volcanic Ash
June 8th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
How ironic that what this Sheila Scarborough characterizes as a step forward is a step backward, specifically because she sees it as a step forward. The fact that crossing the ethical boundary is taken as legitimacy should be a warning against the legitimacy of the genre.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Brave new media, brave new marketing. It's a wild west world and we have not yet begun to find ways to corrupt it. A Kinky Friedman song comes to mind:
Everythings been sold American;
The early times is finished;
And the want ads all been read.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Someone even asked me straight up if I got paid to post what I did on my blog:
http://tinyurl.com/l39qfz
The benefits of my blogging on the Hilton Waikoloa are already paying off for them.
If you google blog search: "Hilton Waikoloa"
http://blogsearch.google.com/?hl=en&tab=wb
You will see that my blog now comes to the top of the page. They gave a complimentary room to Big Island Visitors Bureau. One of their members was not able to go, and at last minute I went and blogged about my experiences.
Social Media is a very powerful tool. Hopefully more businesses as well as tourist realize that.
Most of us blog because we enjoy blogging and tell things the way we see it. Of course we wouldn't talk badly about someone who gave us a gift.
Sheila's post have all had full disclosure about the motivation behind her trip.
June 8th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
The link in Damon Tucker's comment above purportedly answers the question about whether he was paid to post ("I can honestly say that I wasn’t," the linked post says). But he is being anything but honest.
Mr. Tucker told me that he was asked to not say anything bad about the hotel, so the HTA tactics were even more blatant than Dave described. And although Tucker even admits above that he wouldn't say anything bad about a benefactor, he has yet to make such a statement on his own blog, or even fess up that he was treated on the taxpayer's dime.
Tucker likes to often claim that he doesn't blog for money, but the facts – and occasionally even his own words – speak otherwise. He and others can put whatever they want on their blogs, but readers of it and other smore sites beware: What you see is not necessarily what you get.
June 8th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
The EXACT thing I said to Mr. Smith via email was this:
"...Of course they said to me... Please don't say anything bad about the hotel or something to that effect... and I told them... I'll blog what happened and I'm sure things will be fine.
Nothing happened... I had a pleasant time, I blogged about it...."
June 8th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Can't say I didn't try to warn you, Damon. Your responses have landed with a thud.
June 8th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
I understand that drawing conclusions based on a write up in one local newspaper following an extended absence from a great week of connecting with the local community might lead one to become a bit narrow in focus as to the purpose of this trip.
I assure you we weren't after "free vacations" but I respect your interpretation based on your limited view point and lack of involvement and facts.
Here's a personal blog post that may help you better understand the type of people you have so quickly chosen to question the ethics of rather than get to know. The criticism from people with viewpoints such as your own was actually expected. Will it deter me from continuing to want to connect Hawaii with the world via social media? Hardly.
Rather ironic that you also quote Guy Kawasaki. The folks who came to the islands -- who you unfortunately didn't have a chance to meet in person -- are good people. They are not "smores" but I understand your need to extract social media buzz words for the sake of stating your point.
Again, I respect your opinion. I understand that it's based on limited understanding of the people involved. And it's for that reason that I hope you'll afford me the same amount of courtesy and stop by my blog for a read and better understanding of how this tour came about.
Perhaps then you're realize this is more than just trying to score a free trip to Hawaii by writing nice things about the trip.
http://blog.christine.lu/2009/05/23/at-the-intersection-of-hawaii-and-china/
Best regards,
Christine Lu
Cilantro Media
email: christine@cilantromedia.com
twitter: http://twitter.com/christinelu
June 8th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Hi David,
Thanks for your frank and honest thoughts. The issue of whether "press trips" or "fam trips" are legitimate or not is worth discussing, but I can tell you that they are most certainly alive and well, and yes, "reputable media" accept stories based on those trips (although two pubs that I've freelanced for do not - "National Geographic Traveler" and "Condé Nast Traveler," so I won't be sending them stories from Hawaii. They also pay well - $1/word and up - so one can afford to travel independently based on their rates whereas that's not true of other pubs.)
I would submit that some travel stories seen in newspapers and magazines are based on fam trips, but not all publications are nearly as open as they could be about disclosing who paid for what. My readers don't have to guess - I tell them.
I intend to use HTA-sponsored Hawaii trip insights for my travel blogs, and I've disclosed the sponsorship clearly in each associated post on my Family Travel blog (the blog that's hyperlinked to my name above) and my Perceptive Travel blog. I am paid for my content on both blogs, and my editors are OK with press trips as long as I disclose properly, which I've done.
This trip is a "step forward" not because I'm looking for more freebies, but because bloggers and other wired writers/photographers/videographers present new ways of connecting with others. For HTA to recognize our influence (and cede some control of their standard tourism message) is the "step forward."
For too long bloggers have largely been characterized as a bunch of nuts fixated on computers, wearing pajamas in our Mama's basement and incapable of original thought. As a 48-year-old Navy veteran and a successful print freelancer in addition to my online work, I know that this is hogwash.
I'm not sure where our place is in the world yet, but it sure isn't the basement!
Thanks for your time....
June 8th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
I am not a fan of blogging fam trips, simply because it's all fluffy content, how many of these tourism organisations wants you to write about negative and positive experiences?
They want you to say nice things about their hotels and destinations.
Would I trust, or, would I go on holiday to that destination or hotel because of what a blogger writes, no. I would rather read something that is written by someone who has gone on vacation and has not being paid to write about it.
June 8th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
Darren,
Knowing that many folks wouldn't quite understand the reasons for this tour to begin with, I did write a blog post prior to the trip.
http://blog.christine.lu/2009/05/23/at-the-intersection-of-hawaii-and-china/
While it's true that you -- the educated, informed person on all things Hawaii and social media -- may not be influenced by HTA's attempt to embrace social media, the target market for this is much greater than attracting tech savvy American tourists.
There's an entire market out there that HTA has not been reaching. The China market. You've seen how Japanese tourism as played a big role in Hawaii's economy. To the extent that Chinese outbound tourism has surpassed Japanese outbound tourism.
What does this have to do with this recent blogger tour? Plenty. I try my best to explain why but in the end, I realize that the best way to move forward on the bigger objective is to ignore the noise and focus on the big picture. HTA embracing social media to reach new markets isn't a bad thing. Would love your feedback as to how we could have done this better so we can factor that in moving forward.
Cheers,
Christine
June 8th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Blogs and the social media are already "legitimate" and don't need my validation. But I would personally prefer to see it in the form of legitimate providers of valuable independent information rather than legitimate marketing tools.
Disclosure is a good start. It removes some of the odor, but it doesn't disinfect.
If you consider what you do to be journalism, no matter how you deliver it, the SPJ code of ethics (http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp) is as valid for you as it is for me. Read it and decide for yourself if you think this project measured up.
June 8th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Go away, Smores! I block you, relentlessly!
June 9th, 2009 at 12:04 am
Christine, I think what you're trying to do here is a good thing and I believe that continued improvement will make it even better.
I've been following the #hawaiihta tweets since this project started and your tweets in particular. From what I've seen, each time you get asked a tough question, (e.g. ROI or ethical journalism) your responses definitely do not come across as ready and willing to accept input to improve what you're working on.
When the ROI question came up, you referred people to "the long tail" . When Dave, a respected journalist (whom I agree with only about 1/2 the time) puts up a legit issue on junket marketing, you respond by essentially saying he's clueless after thinly veiled tweets complaining about your comments behind held in moderation (which, as all regular readers know, Dave actually hand-approves his comments and to my knowledge has never shut one out due to a differing point of view).
In case folks haven't told you yet, responding like this is definitely NOT being in-tune w/ the local culture. In fact we might question whether you "get it" when it comes to local culture.
You've got a good thing going here and if you can realign your thinking to take tough questions as opportunities to improve what you're doing, you'll go a long way.
We in Hawaii (especially the geek community) all want these efforts to succeed. You have a fantastic opportunity to help all parties: your group, HTA, and various tech communities.
I for one would like to see it happen and love nothing more than to witness you leading it.
June 9th, 2009 at 12:07 am
On an unrelated not, Dave, after scanning http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp, I really wonder what % of today's media channels actually grade themselves using this yardstick.
I'd say it's at an all time low.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:14 am
It seems the real question here is whether or not the bloggers misrepresented their trip as being an objective and unbiased piece of journalism. That doesn't seem to be the case. Isn't that the central issue here?
June 9th, 2009 at 4:33 am
Dave,
I read the SPJ Code of ethics. Bloggers are legitimate, but we should not mistake them for anything other than what they are and "smores" is a pretty good description. I suggest the term "milkers" might also apply. They want tocreate blogs which will allow them to "milk" people or organizations for some sort of material gain.
Sheila writes -- "This trip is a "step forward" not because I'm looking for more freebies, but because bloggers and other wired writers/photographers/videographers present new ways of connecting with others...." Ah yes, 'connecting with others' -- so I guess what that means is that she valitdates herself based on numbers of people who comment on her site. It's something, but not journalism.
Hmm, the next last comment Sheila made -- "As a 48-year-old Navy veteran and a successful print freelancer in addition to my online work, I know that this is hogwash." I am not sure how she got 48 years in the Navy, a full career is 30 years max unless you were Hyman Rickover. I am wondering exactly what she is trying to justify.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:55 am
Maxcat,
If you re-read Sheila's comment. She is a 48 year old Navy veteran. Meaning, she is 48 years old. And she is a Navy veteran. A rather modest one at that. She's a retired Navy commander. While you may not respect her as a blogger, I would think twice about lowering yourself to a level where you show disrespect for people who have served and protected our country ...regardless of what your feelings are towards "smores".
Your negativity comes through and I'm sorry that you feel the need to validate your ill feelings towards a situation by tearing people down. Always difficult having a real dialog with people in that situation so wish you the best of luck.
June 9th, 2009 at 5:15 am
You are right I misread her comment about service. I apologize for my error. I am a 27 year Vietnam veteran, but I don't feel compelled to throw that out ... I don't respect her ... if I found she was in combat I might respect her ... I think her comment was disingenuous and a feeble attempt to add gravitas to her post.
June 9th, 2009 at 5:17 am
Again I made a mistake I am a 27 year veteran of the military with a year tour in Vietnam ...
June 9th, 2009 at 6:21 am
The comment about my Navy service was added to counter some of the standard stereotypes about bloggers.
It was the comment about being 48 years old that was supposed to add the "gravitas."
Plenty of bloggers have no interest in being bound by SPJ codes because they do not consider themselves journalists (Google the phrase "Are bloggers journalists" for some lively links.) I call myself a freelance writer, not a journalist, and my code is just to try to be honest and do the right thing in my work. It requires a lot of personal judgment calls, which I also blog about. My readers can take my work or leave it - up to them.
Complete disclosure is about the only "code" most bloggers would agree on.
Thanks for the discussion, which is definitely worth having....
June 9th, 2009 at 6:41 am
1. Christine Lu:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
... I assure you we weren't after "free vacations" but I respect your interpretation based on your limited view point and lack of involvement and facts.
… And it's for that reason that I hope you'll afford me the same amount of courtesy and stop by my blog for a read and better understanding of how this tour came about.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay you piqued my interest. I looked and it did not take long at all to see that essentially you are a ‘wired’ pr person looking to make money and contacts. Nothing wrong with that. This is a free country and you are allowed and hopefully encouraged to be an entrepreneur. In fact, I compliment you on being very good at PR.
“I’ve spent the past 2 years using social media as a platform for connecting people interested and involved in doing business in China by helping them better understand it.” In short you are a middleman or ‘middlewoman.’ There used to be a term for that in the days of imperialism “cohong.” Ironic that you are in a weird way reinventing that concept. But, just be honest about it, say up front that you are a business person and put a disclaimer up to that effect. Good luck on getting rich. I am sure you will succeed. But, I would prefer it that you not do that at our (taxpayer) expense. Oh and yes, if that makes me negative, well so be it. Oh, enjoy your breakfast with the CEO of Mixi, assume he is paying, so I know you won’t write it off as a business expense.
June 9th, 2009 at 6:45 am
Sheila,
You are more honest than Christine. Thank you for your service and honesty.
June 9th, 2009 at 7:15 am
First, and foremost, for the guy who has to pay the bills in our house: Sheila loses money each year going on these "Great Deals" you guys think are out there. The only money she makes is from her retirement pay as a Surface Warfare Officer. All of the other money is in the negative direction. Yet, she still makes more than me, a teacher.
What needs to be discussed is the fact that the travel industry is investigating whether social media is one of the answers to their woes. Yes, Williamsburg VA brought Sheila out because a nice woman involved with the tourist industry said something to the effect of "you're one of those bloggers? I wonder if you would write something about the tourist triangle." (net: minus a few hundred dollars). Then she meets a travel guy from one of those square states in the middle of the country and he does the same thing (net: minus a few MORE hundred dollars). Now she gets to go to HA! WOOO! Well, first, she was stationed there, 2nd, her Mother's Cousin retired there as SUBPAC and so she had family there. She really did NOT want to go but respects Christine and her efforts and said yes. She then said, "since I'm writing about Family Travel I should bring my son" and HTA agreed as long as we paid for his way. The bills haven't arrived yet but I'm expecting at least a net LOSS of $1000.
So, how's that for disclosure. A "Junket" usually means at no cost or very little cost. I'm sorry but Sheila loses on every one of these and makes, MAYBE, $100 dollars a month from writing on 4 or 5 blogs. She works 12 to 20 hours a day, 7 days a week for what a couple of grand a year? And, you guys have the nerve to question her ethics? Get to know someone before you go so quickly after HER character. And, as a guy, I can see your sexist underpinnings and I am sad for you.
June 9th, 2009 at 7:32 am
Hey, maxcat, I know you have strong feelings on this, we all do, but please back off on slamming Christine. Your suspicion of her motives is unfounded.
I've worked with her on this HTA trip and another tech-related trip to China last fall (for which I paid my own way) and she's never represented herself as anything other than, yes, a businesswoman, a social media-savvy PR and marketing expert and a very qualified "bridge" to China for businesses.
She met HTA representatives when she spoke at PodCamp Hawaii in fall 08 (http://2008.podcamphawaii.com) and they talked about how to generate interest in the islands (during tough economic times) using social media. That was the genesis of the "So Much More Hawaii" blogger fam trip.
HTA thought the trip was worth a shot. If you have concerns as a taxpayer, by all means take them up with HTA (http://www.hawaiitourismauthority.org)
We can argue all day about the efficacy and ethics of HTA's fam trips, but I'm very proud of my association with Christine Lu and can happily attest to her character and business smarts.
June 9th, 2009 at 7:52 am
David, had the blog post been negative toward the island and its hotels and tourist destinations have made them more ethical?
June 9th, 2009 at 8:05 am
FYI, I was one of the blogger "guides" for Oahu for Chef Mark Tafoya (www.remarkablepalate.com) and was not paid for my time--nor were any of the other guides. I was thrilled to be able to show Mark a quick glimpse of my hometown, and will be using the material from our excursions for my own blog. The other guides felt the same.
We didn't sugar coat the tour; my thing was showing Mark things off the beaten path. In the process, I got to see and appreciate the many things Honolulu has to offer.
Bottom line from us tour guides: We did it in the name of promoting Hawaii and meeting new people from around the world. If the blogs create positive buzz about Hawaii and stimulates visitors & the local economy, I'm all for it. (And remember, I'm a full-time freelancer thanks to getting laid off six months ago. I'm thrilled to be able to do my part.)
June 9th, 2009 at 8:09 am
I agree Christine has business smarts. Certainly she is PR savy and a marketing expert. Nothing wrong with making money. Greed is a great motivator. The business of business is business. Just be upfront about it.
June 9th, 2009 at 8:12 am
Hi David,
Interesting blog post. As a J school graduate, freelance newspaper and magazine travel writer, What a Trip blogger and PR professional, I see both sides of the media fence.
If freelance travel writers were paid adequately, we wouldn't need to accept 'hosted' trips. As you are aware, the publishing industry is changing and as a writer, I have selected to embrace social media.
By the way, I found your blog via Twitter.
June 9th, 2009 at 8:17 am
What a "lively discussion" you have here. As a local blogger who participated in this "So Much More Hawaii" project, I would like to state my opinion that this project is so worth it, and the non-local bloggers who participated are very much appreciated by many. Sure their trip here were paid for, but they did their share of promoting Hawaii to help out tourism industry who is in deep trouble at this time of recession. Sure, they didn't (or wouldn't) write bad things about Hawaii, - but that's ok. There are so many good things to write about Hawaii, why expect them to write the bad?
Most people who read blogs read them because they enjoy reading blogs. Some get persuaded by the opinion of bloggers who write well, but it's their readers decision to get influenced by it. I sure hope that the blog posts written by Christine, Sheila and all others who came here would influence their readers to come visit Maui. That's the point.
Is Christine a business woman? In a way she is. This "promoting and connecting through Social Media" is her career. But I can honestly say that what she is doing is helpful to many, and whatever involvement she had with HTA was helpful to Hawaii. It's more than just getting paid.
Was I paid to participate in this So Much More Hawaii Social Media project? NO! Do I have hard feelings about other bloggers from the mainland "being paid" to come here? NO! It's all for the good of Hawaii.
OK. maybe I rambled. But I couldn't let this discussion pass without giving my 2 cents worth
Aloha!
June 9th, 2009 at 8:40 am
I apologize for any delays in approving comments. I'm coming off vacation and playing catch-up getting the blog running again and getting out my Wednesday column. Comments are held for approval the first time somebody posts as a precaution to nip spammers in the bud. After you have a comment approved once, your subsequent comments should post immediately without being held.
June 9th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Wow, quite alot of anger and negativity for something which is designed to help out the state you say you love so much.
I was one of the mainland bloggers invited along, and as Melissa says, I was out for stories of the people who make food, from chefs to farmers to the small stands and shops that people snack at or have lunch at. My mission is to tell the story of the places I visit through their foods and the people who make it. If you look at the content I have produced so far from this trip to Hawaii, you will see that it is far from "favorable coverage for sale at the right price" . I was not paid. My expenses were covered. That is an important distinction. In your rigid interpretation, the only people who would ever be able to write about a destination would be the independently wealthy, paying for it all out of their own pocket. What would be their motivation to write at all? Altruism? Vanity?
The stories I chose to focus on were small companies, chefs and producers, farms that are operating sustainably and businesses that are 100% Hawaiian, not resorts or large corporate interests. If anyone benefits from the media I created on this trip, it will be small independent operations, and more importantly visitors who will learn about great off-the-beaten-path businesses, and festivals such as the Holy Ghost Church festival in Maui. Do you think featuring a quaint church group selling homemade malasadas is selling out? As a taxpayer, wouldn't you like seeing that your tax dollars are going to help reveal pockets of local culture to the outside world, and not just the international hotel chains which dominate the beaches?
I was not asked by any of the HTA folks nor the Island reps to write favorable reviews. At worst, the HawaiiHTA folks mentioned that they are not so proud of the "vog" and joked that they wouldn't mind if we left that out. I commented that being from New York, a little volcanic ash might seem cleaner than what we normally breathe!
At Culinary Media Network, We have an editorial policy clearly stated at the top center of our navigation bar. We state that expenses for our trips to discover different world cuisines are covered by the destinations, but they in no way have any say in the content we put out. Just because a blogger may not write out a list of negatives doesn't make the content suspect. You may interpret YOUR job as a journalist as requiring you to sprinkle in every negative thing you encounter as somehow making you more objective, but my job is to talk about great people making great food, and to share local cultures with my readers and viewers. Don't make the mistake of covering us all with your wet blanket.
June 9th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Peter, I agree that adherence to the SPJ code even among some of the established media is on the wane in these turbulent times. But you can't blame a guy for trying to keep the flame burning.
June 9th, 2009 at 9:22 am
As one of the bloggers that was on this trip I am interested not in arguing the merits of the post, as I believe everyone will have an opinion on both sides, but more interested in the alternative. There will be those that say it was the wrong way to handle it. What is the alternative? You need to get people to buzz about your state and want to get people to talk about Hawaii and the coolness of it and what you can do there, but you can't spend any money doing so. We can be destructive in how we discuss it or we can come up with a better way. I'm curious how the detractors would approach this strategy. I'm working on some of the return on investment ideas for this trip and can already see some pretty cool seo benefits as mentioned here in just these comments. Can you get the same without spending any money? Is time spent money? Do you have to involve your PR firm? Obviously David old media as described is changing its own face and ways it does business. Are you still doing things you did when you started 4 decades ago? Probably not. This is kind of new to all of us and I think that was what Sheila is trying to get across.
June 9th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Just discovered this thread on Dave’s Monday post and let me say – you people are the scum of the journalistic world and a bunch of whores.
Your claim that “it’s not journalism” so you need not be ethical is a joke. You go out and cover events and report on them and whether you want to define it as reporting, it is and requires more than just “disclosure” which may appear somewhere but is not apparent to your readers or played way down. One little notice somewhere, spun the way you spin it in this space is not disclosure- it’s obfuscation and rationalization for the dirty work you do.
And yes there is a lot wrong with PR work when you present it as legitimate journalism. It lacks the qualifying ethics code that Dave referred you to . If you left the world of legitimate journalism, admit it- don’t try to conflate PR work with your “former” profession.
And no there is not difference between getting paid with a freebie or cash.
If you’re going to act as a journalist you need to take the responsibility that goes with it instead of giving journalists who “blog” a bad name because the majority of bloggers who act as journalists are on the take and looking for a big payday by doing things that no legitimate journalist would touch.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:22 am
There is a place for journalism and a place for marketing. My concern as both a provider and consumer of information is when the line between the two becomes blurred.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Chef Mark, are you kidding? There are tons of food and travel stories and reviews out there — print, broadcast and online — where the travel and dining expenses were paid by the information provider, not the destination. Sorry, but if I'm looking for the most credible guidance on where to best spend my food and travel dollar, I look to them, not you.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:58 am
I find it ironic that everyone was worried that it would be the bloggers saying negative stuff about this tour and it turns out the only people bitching, moaning and creating negative publicity about this this are people from Hawaii.
June 9th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Brian, don't misunderstand, I'm not advocating negative reporting. But as a consumer of information, I want to know when I read a positive report that it's the whole of what the writer saw and that nothing was held back because the subject of the report paid the expenses with the implicit understanding that reports would be positive.
June 9th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
How is this any different when HCVB paid for KITV to accompany Lingle on her junket to "promote Hawaii" in Japan? Is KITV a legitimate media outlet? Does KITV follow SPJ's code of ethics?
June 9th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Let consumers decide, we actually don't need you to be the arbitrator, we're smarter then you think, we can read between the lines, you would think this was a discussion about atomic bombs!! We are talking about Hawaii, vacationing and experiencing the islands, very little does goes wrong when you vacation here, you guys should all be ashamed of yourselves!!
June 9th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Charles, funny you should mention KITV and Lingle. I had some thoughts on that (I'm consistent if nothing else):
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2003/Jul/16/op/op05adavid.html
June 9th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Sorry there are those unhappy with HTA's recent campaign. I was pleasantly surprised to see that they began evolving their efforts to complement the digital age.
I appreciate healthy dialogue with constructive criticism. However, I was saddened to see what was being said about and to the bloggers. I had the opportunity to meet and get to know some of them. They are kind, bright, humble and giving. They “got” what the Aloha Spirit is, and I felt, exuded it. I was thankful that they took time to share our Aloha State with the world using a new medium to reach people in different markets.
Blogger Aric S. Queen asked if I could co-host his podcast that would showcase Hawaii's musicians: http://www.roughsundays.com/?p=222 It was out of the context and format for his show, but as he responded to one commenter: "I could have stuck to the original format, but really wanted to push some of these local guys working so hard to put out good stuff that reflects the old traditional songs of the island." Needless to say I did not get paid to do this, but was thankful for the opportunity (including being able to share my music as well).
A commenter stated he was thankful for being introduced to other music from Hawaii, as he only recognized two names from the playlist (Ray Charles and Iz).
A couple of comments posted here resonated with me:
Brian: ... turns out the only people bitching, moaning and creating negative publicity about this this are people from Hawaii.
Christine Lu: ... I realize that the best way to move forward on the bigger objective is to ignore the noise and focus on the big picture. HTA embracing social media to reach new markets isn't a bad thing. Would love your feedback as to how we could have done this better so we can factor that in moving forward.
This is a tough time for us as individuals, and a state which relies heavily on tourism-based revenue. Obviously what we're dealing with goes way beyond us globally. We can do our best with good intentions and continue moving forward, living with aloha... or not. I'm going with the former.
As Christine asked: What are things that could have been done better?
What are other ideas that will help our Aloha State?
June 9th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
As a blogger I was very interested in what the blogging group was doing in Hawaii. I was impressed with their professionalism and enthusiasm for the project. A couple of things that I would like to say are.
This was not a paid vacation. For example Chef Mark’s schedule was intense. Most days he would wake up early in the morning to get in as much of Hawaii’s food culture as he could and would not get back to his hotel until late at night.(I know this via Twitter). They would then upload their info, and make a pod cast. I think he got one hour at the beach the whole time he was here. They worked constantly.
It was not all positive reviews; I heard some negative stuff also.
I personally trust a blog with travel information than print journalism because the reader has more access to the writer thus it is more accountable.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
Brian, hard to read between the lines when you blur them so much.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
I do not think it's that hard to read between the lines. And the good thing about blogs it it's two way. If the reader has doubts or would like to know more, all they have to do is leave a comment or a a question on the comment section. They can even e-mail the bloggers directly.
I had received a couple of e-mails since my participation with So Much More Hawaii. These were from blog reader who just recently discovered my blog. They asked me more question - I gave them honest answers.
As I read the rest of the comments after my initial comment, I was saddened by the name calling done by some commenter. Is that what journalism is about? calling names those who do not keep up to their standards? I hope not. I have not read in any post that the "So much more hawaii bloggers" claimed to be journalist - they presented themselves as bloggers and so there's no point of accusing them of hiding behind journalism when they in fact was promoting something.
Good discussion here - I just wished there weren't name calling because that brought down the level of discussion. Next time we discuss, let's stick to the issues instead of using "using bad language".
June 9th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
[...] My third fam tour, the one to Hawaii, garnered positive press reaction in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and KHON 2 News, but David Shapiro, a journalist blogging for the Honolulu Advertiser, wrote that “the new media folks accepting the freebies were a throwback to the bad old days of journalism when favorable coverage was for sale at the right price” in his post Junketing gets wired. [...]
June 9th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Liza, what I don't understand is why we can't just play it straight so nobody has to read between the lines. If that's going to become the norm, I hope we migrate soon from blogs to vlogs so I can see all the winking and nodding and not have to guess.
June 9th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
There's no two ways about it: junkets are marketing. Those who accept them don't write objectively. Maybe they don't write something sycophantic, maybe they don't write anything at all, but they don't tell the same story they'd tell if the money had come out of their own pocket. The cost of a trip to Hawaii is a big part of the experience; those who are on a junket don't feel that sting and can't write truthfully about whether something was 'worth it' or not. This is how most travel writing is done. It's why most travel writing sucks.
The only thing that's interesting about this is that it's bloggers. The HTA could have spent that money promoting local bloggers who actually describe life on the islands off the beaten track, with local views, with the type of insight that might actually open a new channel for people traveling to the islands. They chose instead to spend the money on some bloggers with a combined readership of what? If the cost of the junket was $15K, the standard "eyeballs" you'd expect to deliver would be 5-7.5 million. Did they deliver that? What kind of metrics is HTA using to judge the ROI on this marketing expense? Frankly, I suspect the HTA got took.
June 9th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
I was a food and travel writer for a major publication based in Chicago for 5 years. In that time, I had a budget the size of a walnut. We were always comped on rooms and food, or else it came out of our budget. Alll I had to do was call a Hotel/Inn/Resort and tell them who I was with and what I was doing and I got a primo treatment. They did require proof of course, So don't think you can start making reservations all over the world. I have to say that the most honest reporting came when the paper was paying the bills. As a journalist, I tried to be objective about everything, but when people were bending over backwards to please you, giving you the best of everything, you really do feel a need to give positive feedback and on top of that, you were getting "special treatment" which really did not equate to the same experience John Q Citizen would have, which is what I was supposed to be writing about.
In the end, I left the paper and went into non-profit PR and then opened a cooking school. Life goes on. And I went on too. Now I am doing a blog on my own and my other writing pays the bills. I like that a lot better.
Devany, Hilo, HI
http://www.myhawaiianhome.blogspot.com
June 9th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Larry, what I thought was interesting from a marketing standpoint was matching Mainland bloggers with local hosts who are extremely active in the social media, especially Twitter. It appear the hope was that the cross-Twittering would have a significant multiplier effect in terms of delivering eyeballs to the various blogs. It was certainly outside-the-box thinking, although it's hard to imagine that it delivered the kind of numbers you're talking about.
What got me going was the notion that getting invited on a junket confers "legitimacy."
June 9th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Guy Kawasaki is the biggest "smore" of them all. Really.
When I looked at So Much More Big Island "contributors" and clicked on Christine Lu, it went to her Twitter which is just a bunch of pointless stuff by a bunch of random people on what seems to be random subjects. I wonder how she got 10K followers! Whatever.
Everyone who participated in this is on a PR junket. Newspapers do this all the time. The Travel Channel – that's all they do. Travel Mags, same thing.
Whatever, I take it with a grain of paʻakai ʻulaʻula.
June 9th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
NeeterLou
It's really hard to base an entire person's character and what they stand for from a click over to their Twitter stream. I'm sure if I clicked over to yours it wouldn't give me an accurate picture of who you are either.
I'm not sure how I got 10K followers either. Your guess is as good as mine. But I do know that i've learned a lot in the past year since using social media and I'm still learning and not afraid to say I don't have everything figured out but am not afraid to try new things to ...even if it means being met with criticism from people who base their judgement on others by a quick glance at random tweets.
Here's a link to my bio. I have nothing to hide. Feel free to ask me any questions or not. And if you have any ideas on how we can do better next time, let me know.
http://blog.christine.lu/about/
Best regards,
Christine
email: christine@christinelu.com
June 9th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Aloha Mr. Shapiro,
As a bonafide member of the media living on the Big Island, this trip raised much concern for me. I wrote a letter to Mr. Mike McCartney, dated on May 28 and still have not received a response. My query goes far beyond a group of mainland bloggers coming to the islands on our taxpayer dollars, especially when there are so many highly qualified writers here in the islands. Here is a portion of the letter I wrote to Mr. McCartney:
"I am a popular journalist/columnist/photographer living on the Big Island. I have been researching HTA as a result of twitter.I have noticed that there are less than 600 people on the twitter account (now barely more than 700 to date) and most of the ones I've read already live in Hawaii. I'm concerned about the advertising strategies used to "reach the masses" to come and spend their tourist dollars throughout the island chain. As an investigative writer and a taxpayer, I must say I am wary about a mainland blogger, as your main blogger, Christine Hu, having the rights and authority to blog for HTA, especially when there are so many excellent writers right here in the islands. I am also concerned that there are people associated with HTA who are using their association with HTA to harass and intimidate other marketing individuals living and working in the islands because they have a much larger following on twitter. Also, I have also read from people associated with the HTA twitter that it's quality over quantity for them. I say, however, that it has to be both and, if you don't have someone with a large following, then you aren't reaching many people!
Also, the latest effort to spend the taxpayer's dollars to bring in mainland bloggers seems a HUGE waste of money. I have gone to their sites and do not understand how most were picked for this, or do I think they will be effective as most have small followings.
What I want is an accountability of funds spent on the twitter/tweet-ups/bloggers/website. How many hits does your website get (which, BTW, is not very attractive or exciting) and what kind of tracking/analytics program(s) are you using to reach your intended audience? This is to assure that the hit counts are not fabricated, but come w/ true IEP addresses and the ability to track when/where/how/why they are coming from.
I do have a lot of questions about the strategies/monies HTA is using to bring more tourist traffic to our islands. Although I feel the Internet can be the most effective tool, I do not feel HTA is using it properly. A vibrant website would be a great start, along with a connection to people who have huge followings on twitter would be the start of reaching the masses."
To wrap it up, Mr. Shapiro, if you could find out the answers to these questions, and to find out why my original query wasn't answered. Also, could you check up on these bloggers and the actual traffic that is driven to their site? I would venture to say the numbers are very low and it wasn't worth the price the residents of Hawaii had to pay to bring/keep them here. Is this how we're going to waste our HTA funds?
Mahalo,
Karen Welsh
Hilo, Hawaii
June 9th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
Speaking of a grain of pa`akai `ula`ula, Chef Mark, I just visited your blog and viewed your video including the Hawaiian salt segment. Not bad. But it included no disclosure about how much you received from the State of Hawaii so that you could do that video. Let's see, couple thousand for air fare, maybe anouther thou for other expenses. It would have been so easy to have included a short billboard thanking them, for example.
Ok, your post here says that someplace on your website is an editorial policy. I did find it. But only because you said I should click in the middle of your navigation bar. That's not much of a disclosure. I doubt that without your guidance most others would ever get to see it. (Noted that Sheila Scarborough included a disclosure at the end of her current article).
Having taken the trip, unless you reimburse the State for their costs, you're stuck with the ethical issue of either disclosing that you accepted all that loot (in the form of transportation, meals, and material for your business), or not disclosing it and having others occasionally discover it as they search around to learn more about you or to find more of your work.
And there's not much you can do about it, I'm afraid. Google will find this.
Perhaps what bloggers lack in formal journalism education, google will make up for, the great leveler that finds things when people search for a name.
So in journalism school they will probably continue to teach a segment on ethics, while if there ever is a blogging school, they might note that whatever you do, including accepting hugely expensive trips to Hawaii, Chef Mark, there is a risk that the search engines will turn it up. Soon and almost forever.
June 9th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
I served as one of the local hosts for Chef Mark taking him to Maui and the Big Island. It was a great privilege to share with him the many exemplary local farmers, chefs and places that make life here so rich and wonderful.
This pairing of local guides with their like mainland counterparts was done with the best of intentions - to provide the bloggers with a genuine and authentic experience. The places and people I shared with Chef Mark, were based on my knowledge as a culinary producer and never dictated by HTA or PR entities.
I am saddened by some of the negative noise and name calling. During his time here,Chef Mark worked incredibly hard; videotaping, interviewing and shooting still photos. The days were long and his commitment to getting beyond stereotypical images of Hawaii were deeply important to him. Proof of his prolific work http://www.culinarymedianetwork.com/
During these challenging economic times when we all must think of strategic and new ways to do more with less, I commend HTA and tour organizers for spurring dialog and creating opportunities for small farmers and businesses to shine in the spotlight.
Melanie Kosaka
First Daughter Mediaworks, Inc.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
There are serious issues here that deserve questioning, but I agree it would be helpful to tone down the individual name calling. It contributes little of worth to the discussion.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
I sense a lot of jealousy from those in the "Journalism" field that they feel that blogs are threatening their turf.
Journalist and PR folks have been getting comped since comp's were around. Now Bloggers start getting them and the Journalist are pissed?
I don't see many newspapers talking badly about their advertisers?
I've had a little box on my blog that says "Will Blog for Food" since pretty much the inception of my blog.
Times are changing folks and the way people are receiving their news now is much different.
No wonder why people in traditional media feel threatened by us "Average Joes" that do what we like to do for many different reasons.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Damon, I've been in daily journalism for 41 years in positions ranging from reporter to managing editor and can't recall ever accepting a significant comp. Some of the places I've worked you could be fired for taking a freebie. I'd be happy to point you to several stories I've been involved with that reflected badly on advertisers if you're interested. To argue that times are changing and think that everything new media is good and everything old media is bad isn't thinking. To believe you've successfully reinvented the wheel without bothering to educate yourself on what came before you is empty conceit.
June 10th, 2009 at 12:19 am
Mr. Shapiro,
I myself have much respect for journalists.
Empty conceit is not what I had in mind. This has been a great thread to follow, and I can say myself that I was a doubter originally with this whole HTA Bloggers tour and was asked why I changed my mind about things.
I have a child. I don't want my child to go through what many children are going through here on the Big Island.
Our economy is tanking. Tourism has always been a major source of income.
Much of the press that is displayed in the local papers show much of the negative sides of Hawaii.
I have often expressed my displeasure of people moving to Hawaii and increasing the tax burden on many of us.
Many local kids here on the Big Island don't have much to do these days.
Drugs, Crime and Getting pregnant seems to be the norm.
The Big Island needs money to start getting more things for people in general.
Kids now a days leave this island and have very little chance of coming back to the place where they are born simply because the economy sucks.
As a parent of a young child... Blogging about positive things now in the island can go along ways for my child being able to possibly stay in these islands 15-20 years from now.
Long term implications of this project will be very hard to evaluate, short term effects can be analyzed through google analytical programs I believe.
I appreciate you bringing this to the attention to many folks that don't realize that it is a double edged sword.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:10 am
I want to apologize in advance for needing this explained to me, I could probably sift through the comments, but it's early and I'm coffee-less.
David Shapiro, is this an accusation or a complaint? again, I want to fully understand what you're saying before responding.
are you implying that we took a free holiday in exchange for saying kind things?
[and/or]
are you implying that the group was only put together because we're all friends?
June 10th, 2009 at 6:06 am
I went back to re-read your blog entry and the basic gist is, you think the HTA selected bloggers who are active in social media to get freebies, and in turn are unethical. Seriously, this was not the case. If you look at their blogs, they work hard at their craft and do their best to share their experiences through their unique first-person perspective. This is what you do through your blog, yes?
With only a limited number of slots to make such a project work, they chose legitimate bloggers who have significant readership and, most importantly, are influential with their targeted audiences. Anyone can put up a blog. How many are actually good at it? These guys are. And I learned so much from Mark (in the short time I got to spend with him) on tools that enhance the readers' experience, which is important in delivering authenticity.
I know that Mark does not do food reviews. In his blogs, he describes things as they are, but he's not going to give a glowing review nor is he going to make disparaging remarks about the restaurant. That's not what the blog is about--it's about sharing the experience. He has a lot of followers on Twitter because his content is useful.
I would hope that my content is useful, as well. I don't run around trying to solicit followers; people somehow find me and start following. I think the same can be said for the bloggers who came to Hawaii--some of us are not following each other simply because our Twitter/blog content is not of interest to each other. I point this out so that you understand, we're active in social media, but are not all a bunch of social media whores. We try to use our blogs and twitters to do good, and in a truthful way. There's so much negativity in the world now, even among our colleagues. Shouldn't we try to use our expertise to do good?
The result of the HTA bloggers' influence will not be immediate, but I am confident we--as a state that depends on tourism--will reap the benefits from their experience. As someone who calls the unemployment hotline every two weeks, that's really what matters to me. I would hope that matters to you, too.
June 10th, 2009 at 7:16 am
I think you've hit a nerve here. Great column. Just curious, Mr. Ash. Did you feel the same way and/or write a column when the DNC sent all those bloggers (including at least one from Hawaii) to cover the convention last summer? And we all know, of course, that when we're talking journalists we aren't talking about sports reporters, who take all kind of freebies and even publicly root for the teams they are supposed to be covering objectively. I kind of look on travel writers and bloggers in a similar fashion. But then, that's me. Thanks for bringing this forum to the smores.
N
June 10th, 2009 at 7:35 am
Well Dave, if nothing else, you've proven that the network works. Look at the mobilization of all these bloggers. Personally, I don't have a problem with the blogging movement, but there still needs to be disclosure of things like paid vacations that are reviewed. Apparently, not all in the "professional" blogging community seem to agree on the importance of truth and ethics. When someone says getting paid to write a review is substantially different from getting all expenses paid, that's a significant difference in values, and a terrible lack of judgement, if you ask me. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure some of these folks work very hard and are very bright - it's just that it sounds like their system of professional values is questionable.
The fact that several have chosen to 1) respond and 2) respond by denigrating the locals also speaks volumes for their "professionalism." Not all, but several.
June 10th, 2009 at 7:58 am
Nancy, no sports reporters — or travel and feature writers — for any publication I edited or reported for ever took "all kinds of freebies." I was only peripherally aware of the DNC and the bloggers. Did the DNC actually pay the expenses of bloggers or just make credentials available to bloggers the same as traditional media? If the latter, I would applaud the recognition that some independent bloggers are doing excellent journalism and deserve access like any other media. If the former, I would say the work of any reporter from any media accepting paid accommodation from a political party to cover its convention is inherently tainted and of little value to news consumers.
Melissa and Aric, I would say the same thing in response to your questions. Accepting freebies has been a discredited practice among reputable news providers for some time because it compromises independence, objectivity and credibility. I take issue with any claim that being invited on a junket confers journalistic "legitimacy" upon a blogger. I have less of an issue with marketing-oriented bloggers in the HTA project who make no claim to practicing journalism.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:30 am
Okay, okay, rereading this I may have been too harsh. So, I reread this thing today and note:
Journalists have a Code of ethics which many journalists really try to abide by. Bloggers do not. But, many bloggers feel that they try to be honest. Each blogger apparently has his or her opinion of what honesty is. In other words (and I admit I am guilty), I decide what suits my own particular situational ethics at any given moment.
Bloggers were engaged to come up with ways to broaden access to what Hawai’i has to offer via the ‘social media.’ This is not inherently a bad thing.
Bloggers and social media have proliferated like crazy. You can find a blog about almost anything. The range of opinions is almost beyond belief. Where besides the internet can we go from the Daily Kos to the Huffington Post or for foodies from Anthony Bourdain to Sandra Lee. The internet is an amazing thing, but anyone can and will blog about whatever they want. Anyone can claim to be anything. What is interesting in Volcanic Ash is the way bloggers quickly came to the defense of each other. It shows -- as did the Obama campaign website -- that a barrage of ‘voices’ can quickly be brought to bear and mobilized. It also shows tremendous fund raising capacity.
I don’t want the internet regulated. Social media will continue to proliferate and evolve. Not sure what will come after Face Book, tweets and so on. Does anyone remember Xanga? Do people over the age of 13 use MySpace? But, the problem is that anyone can write anything about whatever because there is almost no regulation. That is a mixed blessing. Caveat Emptor still applies.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Kudos to maxcat for rolling back in here with some updated thoughts. He says, "I don’t want the internet regulated" and of course that's the blessing and curse of blogging; it is wide-open and unregulated, so anyone can say what they want.
Other than blog trolls and other annoyances, we like it that way.
However, this implies a greater burden on the reader, for sure (maxcat says and he's right - "Caveat Emptor.") The reader, not the journalist or newspaper or magazine, must now sort out whose content is worthwhile and whose is not. Fortunately, since Web content is searchable and archivable forever, it's a lot easier than it used to be to figure out who is squirrely or who has an agenda in their back pocket.
If my readers distrust my Hawaii content and decide that I'm in the squirrely category, they can click away and not read my work (probably after they leave a public comment to that effect, too.) Some print journalists are just now getting used to this sort of 24/7 hyper-focused public scrutiny, but it's all in a day's blogging for me. I live and die by my real world and Internet reputation.
Name-calling on ethics, however, is a dangerous game, online or off.
One used to trust mainstream media to be ethical, one "assumed" that those SPJ-code-following journalists were honest. Newsflash - for many people nowadays, it is hard to maintain that trust (Jayson Blair at the "New York Times," anyone? Maureen Dowd's little plagiarism problem? The usefulness of the press pool flying around with political candidates, all reporting the same story of when the candidate played basketball? C'mon.)
I know a lot of journalists, including my own mother. I very much respect their input, when it is measured and accurate. I know that their competence and motivation are questioned all the time, just as mine are being questioned here.
Many journalists really know their stuff. I know mine, too. Thanks to this post (which is all over Twitter) and all of the content created so far from the "So Much More Hawaii" tour (and then linked to, Stumbled, bookmarked in Delicious, posted on Facebook, etc.) I would say that we've attracted eyeballs that might not have given the islands the time of day otherwise.
Will they decide that our blogger participant content is uniformly tainted? It's not up to any of us. It's up to them.
June 10th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Sheila, with all due respect, you're pulling rules out of your okole as you go to justify whatever you want to do at the moment. It's always been the readers who decide whose content is worthwhile and traditional media are no more "regulated" on ethics than the Internet. The most reputable media self-regulate rather than self-indulge because they learned the hard way that good ethics make good business in the highest sense of that term. I guess you'll have to learn the hard way, too. Or not. But trust this: If the New York Times disappears, there won't be much argument that it'll be a far greater loss than if the blogs involved in the HTA junket disappear.
June 10th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Earl of Sandwich et al, I think it's sad that this issue keeps turning into a locals vs. non-local debate.
The fact of the matter is, I was a person reacting to the term "social media whore" being thrown towards the direction of good people. I'm human. When negative things are said, feelings get hurt. As someone who has lived a number of places in the world including Hawaii, I don't view things as local vs. outsider.
If you want to speak to the professionalism of those involved in this social media project, then let's discuss that in a manner that is professional. If you're judging based on reaction and follow up comments to being called an SM whore, in hindsight perhaps the most professional thing I could have done there was ignored this post altogether.
I'm no longer going to comment on here. It's not productive to what I set out to do. I wish you all luck in this debate. It's very demotivating for me.
Cheers,
Christine
June 10th, 2009 at 10:25 am
What many of you “I’m not a journalist, just a blogger” types fail to recognize that you are de facto journalists by virtue of the function you perform- reporting on whatever it is you report on.
No one is devaluating the “I’m just a blogger” types except when you all get squirrelly when it comes to the ethical standards that your reporting requires. You want it both ways- the legitimacy of your reporting without the standards that bestow that legitimacy.
My problem is that it blurs the distinction between “journalists who blog” and “bloggers that perform journalistic functions” causing journalists that blog to be tainted by the lack of ethics in the blogging community.
The arguments made here are childish- one is that “everyone is doing it” (including the MSM these days) so that makes it ok and the second is “I didn’t take that much”.
The joke comes to mind about the young good-looking guy who offers a woman in a bar a million dollars to have sex with him.
The woman thinks “wow- I’m really don’t want to have sex for money but hey- I could use the million dollars and this guy is kinda cute to boot”.
So she tells the guy ok and he says “well how about 20 bucks?”.
She looks shocked and asks “what kind of girl do you think I am?”.
He says “well, we established that already. Now were just haggling over price.”
June 10th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Regarding Sheila's last comment, if we're going to leave it up to the "eyeballs" to assess taint, then they need information, including whether posts were junket-driven. That is the crux of this discussion, not how nice the bloggers are, the value of their contributions or how hard they work for little compensation.
In your case, Sheila, you said in a recent post on your blog (a letter to Ian McKee) that you always provide that information. That is commendable, yet you're still sending mixed messages, because in the next paragraph you describe being in Hawaii writing "free copy." I'm not sure how "free" that copy is, especially to the taxpayers of Hawaii who paid to bring you here.
And Dave, if I remember correctly, the bloggers paid their own way to the DNC.
And Ms. Welsh, as Dave is probably too gracious to respond, I'm curious why a "bonafide member of the media" and "popular journalist/columnist/photographer" needs someone else to do their research?
June 10th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Well, the argument won't be settled here, and no one holds all the answers. Best wishes to all of you.
June 10th, 2009 at 11:36 am
@ Christine Lu
Don't be demotivated, it's all down to the individual. I think what bloggers need to do is realise that when they write a review they have to be impartial. If the destination, hotel or travel product is fantastic and there's really nothing wrong with it then add what you would do to make it better.
People reading the review will make up their own judgement and remember consumers aren't bloggers, they will read it a different way.
Yes, blogging is a form of journalism, but I would certainly not call myself a journalist. Bloggers have an opinion, where journalists have to be in the middle of the road.
June 10th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Christine, I don't know if you will read this, but I agree that the term "social media whores" was a bit harsh to say the least, and you have every right to defend yourself and those like you. However, you're also right that the most professional thing you could have done was not respond and get caught up in the invective. Also, the fact that you then justify getting out of the debate because "it's very demotivating" for you, well, doesn't really help your case toward a professional reputation. As a blogger, and most importantly someone who is doing it for income, you of all people should know how easy it would be for another blogger to put that kind of spoiled-child comment out there and wreck your reputation. (That's not a threat, BTW, I just comment, I don't have any blogs. It's just an observation.) Anyway, I hope you take the constructive criticism for what its worth. Best of luck.
June 10th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Forget the label, the fundamental question is "Who are you serving with your work?" A journalist's duty is to the reader. A marketer's duty is to the advertiser. If your duty is to the reader, then it's obvious that accepting comps is, at best, problematic. How can your reader trust that you're giving your honest opinion? "Because comps have always been part of how it's done," "Because I might never have done this without the comp," "Because I might not have had time to do this were it a real vacation," all may be true, but they're irrelevant: If you accept a comp, your experience is _not_ the same experience as a traveler.
And one of the major points about blogs is that the gates have been opened. It may have been true once that the "channel" to potential vacationers ran through travel magazines; it's certainly not true anymore. Apparently one of the bloggers did a post on sea salt; Googling "hawaiian sea salt site:wordpress.com" reveals 45,600 blog hits. The #1 return is a blog called hawaiianfoodrecipe.wordpress.com. Has the HTA reached out to that (local) blogger? Wouldn't that have been a better use of taxpayer money?
June 10th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
@damon "I sense a lot of jealousy from those in the "Journalism" field that they feel that blogs are threatening their turf."
When a journalist reads a blog post that was whipped out in five minutes without any fact checking, without any regard for the other side of the story, without any obligation to ethics, it's not jealousy they feel. It's bitterness that the values that they believe in and made their career are not valued.
June 10th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
David, consistency is the hobgoblin of . . . well, you get the point.
Goes to show that you may have some psychic abilities when you wrote way back when: "But it becomes a concern if she makes a habit of stubbornly refusing to acknowledge obvious mistakes and learn from them."
I'll let others judge whether the administration learned to move away from the "circle-the-wagons" mentality. I have my opinion, of course.
June 10th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
David, thank you for shepherding this discussion along. It must have a zillion hits already, with zillions more on the way.
I just want to offer that I think journalists, authors and others recognize that ethics protects their work, even their incomes. It safeguards their assets. This actually applies to anyone, in any line of work. Bloggers too, if they care about what they have written and want it to be taken seriously. Ethics are self-adopted for self-protection. I don't think they need to be codified, though they may. I enjoyed a long debate (in person, it can be done) years ago about the rank and function of laws,ethics,morality and rules. Maybe there was something else also, I can't remember.
Sure, each individual can do as she/he likes, that has always been the case. We had fun in our debate (on the Oregon Coast over local microbrew stout). That worked well for us and was more fun than typing into my computer in my socks and underwear.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Charles, Emerson's actual quote was that foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. Akamai consistency like mine is different.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
David, touche.
And Emerson concluded, " . . . adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."
Let me guess. You're a philosopher?
June 11th, 2009 at 5:31 am
david,
again, can you answer the questions so I can be sure about what you're saying?
you're questioning our 'journalistic "legitimacy"'
are you implying that we took a free holiday in exchange for saying kind things?
[and/or]
are you implying that the group was only put together because we're all friends?
thanks.
June 11th, 2009 at 7:05 am
"Apparently one of the bloggers did a post on sea salt; Googling "hawaiian sea salt site:wordpress.com" reveals 45,600 blog hits. The #1 return is a blog called hawaiianfoodrecipe.wordpress.com. Has the HTA reached out to that (local) blogger? Wouldn't that have been a better use of taxpayer money?"
Finally, Larry we are getting into the real meat of why this project occurred. Now my question to you in order to respond to the last question above is "Why?" What is the reason you believe that to be a better use of "social Media" and "taxpayer money".
June 11th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Aric, obviously HTA wouldn't have paid for you to come to Hawai'i if there wasn't an expectation that you would report favorable things. From what I've seen, expectations were met. I'm not sure I understand your second point, but whether or not you're friends isn't a concern to me.
June 12th, 2009 at 7:25 am
instead of money on bloggers, a little advertising aimed at all the military..."hey...isn't it time for the family to come visit you?"
It worked with us! We came to Oahu, loved it and spent $$$. We've also spread the word when we came home!
June 12th, 2009 at 9:06 am
wow.
okay, first off - to anyone reading this blog [which, people will tell you as they have me, is not a popular blog, thus the calling-out post here...re-visit this from time-to-time and you'll see what I mean], this is one individual and not the 99.999% of people and attitude we came into contact with in Hawai'i - so please don't judge it by ridiculous posts by someone who claims to have been in the biz for longer than I've been alive.
that being said...
we came to Hawai'i to find the different aspects that we all specialize in. we found them, wrote about the good ones and that's it.
now, if you take take HTA/Cilantro Media at 'payola accusations' from that, then the next time you go somewhere to eat, have a nice meal and end up telling someone about it, then I'm going to do the same.
Hawai'i has areas that a lot of people don't know about. we were brought in to write/film/record these things and send them to our respective audiences.
so what is it? Hawai'i is better seen through the eyes of the locals? of course it is - thus, our taping/writing/recording/photographing that.
I'm actually saddened more than I am humored at this attempt to bring hits to a blog. 4 decades on the island and *this* is the most you can offer? perhaps if you start offering content that's useful, one day you too will be included.
shame on you.
June 12th, 2009 at 10:55 am
Aric, Aric, Aric!
You try my patience.
David Shapiro is an exceptional journalist who writes with integrity, wit and style. You could learn a lot from him if you chose. Instead you choose to live a very, very different life. That is your right. But, there is absolutely no comparison between his ethics and yours.
Here is the difference between you and David. If none of this had transpired and he met you, he might offer to buy you a beer. If, on the other hand, he didn't know you and was just sitting in the bar, things would unfold differently. You would walk up to him with some story about how you were unable to use your credit card and ask him to buy you a beer and supper.
June 12th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
The sooner folks back off from the "no comparison between his ethics and yours" sweeping statements, the better.
None of us has directly impugned Mr. Shapiro's "integrity, wit and style" and the same courtesy in return would be appreciated (and it would better serve your position.)
Kindly live up to all those high standards for which some of you seem to consider yourselves the only arbiters.
June 12th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Hi Paula,
Thanks for your comment - I'm drafting a family travel blog post on military recreation opportunities in the islands, including of course the Hale Koa but also the Joint Services Recreation facility in Volcanoes National Park and the cottages at Barking Sands on Kauai. I agree that Hawaii's military market travel options should be highlighted more often.
June 12th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
aric, it is unfortunate that you judge blogs solely by their popularity and not by the quality of their content. I guess that would make ones featuring scandals or otherwise appealing to base instincts tops with you. No wonder you're sad.
It appears that you're also very insecure, since you feel the need to describe Dave's efforts as ridiculous and not useful. But then people like Dave who take stands on factors other than the way the wind is blowing that day are accustomed to cheap shots.
And if you think Dave did this to drum up hits, you also have much to learn. Dave has nothing to prove to this newspaper or the people of Hawaii.
June 12th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Sheila, I hadn't seen your latest posts before my last one, but I have to ask. You don't consider Mr. Queen's comments as directly impugning Dave? Or is it that he is not one of you?
June 12th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
"Or is it that he is not one of you?"
Sorry, not playing the tribal game.
June 12th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Sheila
"The sooner folks back off from the "no comparison between his ethics and yours" sweeping statements, the better. "
Sheila the comment is specific not sweeping. David's ethics are there for all to see. Aric came to a battle of ethics lightly armed. Defend Aric if you feel compelled to do so, that is your right. If you want to generalize the comment and scenario to yourself, you may. But, I suspect you might also have bought Aric a beer.
June 12th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Disclosure! I buy my own beer!
** Shiner Bock
** Choc 1919 (Oklahoma)
** Sam Adams Boston Lager
** Alfa Bokbier (Dutch)
I did try Longboard (disclosure! bought it myself!) and liked it a lot, but it couldn't crack the top 4. Close, though.
June 12th, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Boy, wouldn't you know that a blog about bloggers would invite the most blogging.
June 13th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Aric... Dude... it's alright... don't worry about the hate. Some of us blog from our hearts and both of us know where we come from because we actually met.
And by the way... you owe me beers the next time your here.
I think Aric's comments may be a bit harsh because the group of people that he came here with is getting attacked.
Aric himself is one of the most humble dudes I've met from the mainland to be quite honest...
Anyone that actually knows him and knows his life story... would have the same respect for him that I do.
I respect journalists as well as I mentioned earlier in this thread.
June 18th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
..hello? Where'd everyone go? Dang, I feel that I've shown up late to the party (not an altogether novel feeling) Funny thing though, I wrote about this a while ago:
http://islandnotes.wordpress.com/2009/05/25/so-much-more-than-mai-tais/
Was perplexed as to why other circumspect observations weren't floating around. (note to self: Darren, learn to pimp better.)
Anyway, this is the discussion I was looking for. At the time of the marketing campaign, my queries were, for obvious reasons, not responded to by the "bloggers". But then, some of them write in terms of "sponsored conversations", which would exclude me and my blog.
("ISLANDNOTES.ORG Come one, come all!" ..ya, that's how.)
I won't belabor the educational discussion that took place here. I do know that Christine was off to her next campaign, "geeks on a plane.com" which is perhaps the new way that we are presenting largely amoral global venture capitalism (kinda cute though, don't you think?) It does seem to me that some of these folks possess value-sets that can not even recognize their conflicts. But I digress.
Interestingly, in all of this discussion, what never came up is the fact that the Hawaii Tourism Authority is, besides pimping, also charged with Hawaii's "social, cultural, and environmental" wellbeing. As such, the type of obfuscation and confusion that this 'buzz and viral marketing' by social media-whatevers is certainly worthy of such discussion.
(I'll just sweep up a bit and put away some chairs..)
Mahalo
June 21st, 2009 at 9:39 am
@Jim Turner asked "...What is the reason you believe that [sponsoring the local blogger who's a #1 Google hit] to be a better use of 'social Media' and 'taxpayer money'?"
(a) All things being equal, I prefer my money, tax money in particular, to return to the local economy. So if two channels have equal reach and likely impact, I prefer supporting a local resource. (b) In this case, it's not equal: the local blogger is a higher return on Google than the "celebrity" blogger. If the idea was "promote awareness of Hawaiian cuisine," then the better return on the dollar would be to support a blogger who is likely to blog about Hawaiian cuisine and recipes again and again.
Unlike traditional travel writing, the point of blogging is that there is continuous coverage on a subject of interest AND that archives are forever just a search-engine click away. Instead of junkets that may have caused (I dunno') a dozen or so posts and a few thousand page-views, if the HTA wants to use new media to increase tourism, they should be supporting _continuing_ blogs on subjects that tourists find interesting. (For instance, Hawaiian cuisine but, say, golf, scuba, hiking, surfing, Kilauea lava flows, bicycling, nature, etc.) The fact that such blogs are more likely to be written by locals is a bonus.
June 24th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
I'll try to stay within the parameters set out in your response Larry. I am not sure I understood the response completely but perhaps this will open a new dialogue separate from some other points discussed.
I am not sure what "all things are equal" are in any regard, but assuming it was I can assure you all of your money, except for perhaps what money was sent to the different airlines, probably remained right in your own yard. I stayed in hotels that benefited from the money spent, as well as those employees earning tips and other such remunerations resulting from my stay. Locals I am assuming would be staying in their own homes and not spending this money so really that is where I am not sure about the "equal" issue. I think that there is some amount of stimulus to the visitation as I know I had less money in my bank than when I started.
I am not sure how to respond to the local blogger being a high return on Google and that may need some further discussion on your part of explain that part to me, but I can assure you that reach is reach no matter where it comes from. I am not sure about the quality of reach as it pertains to a local person. The apples and oranges of that one is like saying "Come to our island it is nice," versus the other statement, "go to their island it is nice" statement from another.
I have often said that I am not a travel writer but I was able to reach a large number of my own followers/readers/friends with what I did there. I think it is awesome that when were were there we were able to ask the businesses about their tourism business plans and what they were doing to market and other info. I know for one I gave out free advice to any of the businesses interested. One of our guides is now using Twitter and is thinking of using other forms of social media. A few of the businesses we talked to and put on our sites are now getting some awareness that they would not have otherwise had. Yes, you have a large number of local bloggers but obviously they are not out to promote their own. Perhaps because they take shave ice for granted and it is not something they think people might like to experience, but because I had never had it before as an outsider, I am talking about it and suddenly it becomes relevant.
Perhaps now is the time to kick the door in at the HTA to say, "HEY! We are here, we are local and we want to help!" They may have a whole different attitude. I can assure you that the money spent was all spent right in your own backyard. I for one, never having had the experience of Hawaii before, would recommend it over many other places to visit now and spend my own vacation dollars. Isn't that the end result that was the idea behind this?
I'm trying to put myself in your shoes Larry and I cannot seem to get the idea that somehow this was bad. Every business involved benefited, everyone employed by those businesses came out better off, I'm still trying to figure a way to get back there and take my family. None of your taxpayer dollars come home with me. All I took home was a sunburn and some great stories to tell about your home.