cruisers or charity workers: what type of tourist is worse?
Pity those poor fools who signed up for the Caribbean cruise that failed to alter its course after the Haitian earthquake. There they were this week, living it up with barbecues on golden beaches while the stench of death and suffering drifted by.
I just got an email from a friend at a charity who told me that for three hours today he was making plans for a trip to Haiti next week. I told him that I thought it was good that he’d since had the trip canceled. I wonder if there’s going to be a bit of a backlash against certain charities after the dust has settled. I know I’m feeling a bit cynical about it all.
You see, these times of national disasters are also times of great potential for charities like my friend’s. If they don’t appear to be doing things then their market share is threatened. Marketing is now a part of disaster relief.
Now, I know that so many of the charities do good work, and I know that people taking a cruise is also a reasonable way to spend your time and money. But the confluence of both on the island of Haiti right now makes me sad. In fact, I’m less disappointed with the cruise-ship tourists than I am with the disaster tourists. Ok, perhaps that’s a little strong, but I know that there’s considerable pressure to get some decent footage with logos highly visible.
What’s worse; near-total ignorance or mild exploitation?
- the death of busyness
- does charity need reinvention?
- social media, christianity and the whiff of hypocrisy (or why I get annoyed with christians on twitter and Facebook)
- Deciding Enough Is Enough
- the way the river flows