Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Source Of Inspiration: On popular tourist destinations

I have a problem with journalists and writers who do not cite sources. It is a problem that has been exacerbated ever since the lazy writer or one desperate to knock off a few hundred words in order to meet a fast-approaching deadline took to using Wikipedia and other sites as get-out-of-jail cards, sometimes using verbatim what can be found on the internet with not a mention of or an acknowledgement as to the source.

Easy it may be to cobble something together with the aid of Google and the cut and paste commands, but it is short-changing not only the reader but also the writer him or herself. Some while ago, I drew attention to the apparent lifting of text from the home page of puertopollensa.com by a journalist writing in "The Sun". It was bad form and it was also a derogation of the journalistic art. For the journalist or other writers, words - his or her own - are the stock-in-trade. Even paraphrasing shows some attempt at originality, but what amounts to plagiarism is nothing of the sort and "in journalism, plagiarism is considered a breach of journalistic ethics". Where does this quote come from? Wikipedia of course.

One might argue that recourse to using chunks of text from websites is a way of working "smart". Really? I'm not sure that there's anything particularly smart about it. It's not smart, it's not big and it's not clever (and I think Steve Wright was the one who popularised the not big and not clever line, or rather popliarised, as he would have said - I can cite sources till the cows come home; and no, I don't know who came up with that saying. Look it up if you wish; on Wikipedia).

There is another type of non-acknowledgement, which is the unnamed or vague source. Sometimes this can be understandable, when someone prefers not to be named. Fair enough, and it happens all the time, as in, for example, "government sources said". But there are times when it is far less understandable, which brings me to where I really want to be today. In "The Bulletin" yesterday, the editorial referred to "an article in a top British newspaper over the weekend". Apparently this article revealed that Mallorca has slumped to the number eight spot of the "most popular destination(s) with British tourists". The editorial went on to use this as a means of beating the island's tourism. It may well indeed need a beating, but this is not the point. What is, is that because the source is not named, there is no way that the reader, myself in this instance, can check where the article came from or, as importantly, the context and rigour of the results. Well, I suppose one could by spending ages going through Google in the hope of unearthing it, which is in fact what I started to do, but to no avail.

Without being able to identify the source, the reader is left with an incomplete and potentially unreliable picture. There are, it may not have escaped your attention, any number of these "top ten" or "top one hundred"-style articles knocking around in the press. Some have a basis in research, e.g. that which is offered by the likes of ABTA, the tour operators and market research companies; others don't necessarily.

All I did manage to find when a-googling was an article from "The Daily Record", dated 14 July. This made the observation that western Mediterranean destinations are losing ground to those in the eastern Med and north Africa. But we know this anyway. What the article also revealed, seemingly based on what Co-operative Travel had to say and possibly contrary to the trend, was that the "predicted holiday destination hotspots" for 2011-2012 will be Turkey at number one and at number two ... The Balearic Islands. So much for a lack of popularity.

Maybe Mallorca is at number eight, and if so it is less than heartening news, but there can be all sorts of explanations as to why. If one doesn't know the source or the context, one cannot make a full judgement or at least be given the opportunity to make such a judgement. This is just one reason why sources should be acknowledged.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

No comments: