Cinema, Destination Image and Place Branding Cinema, Destination Image & Place Branding - Page 152

CINEMA, DESTINATION IMAGE & PLACE BRANDING 2011). There are yet those that undertake macroeconomic analysis (Croy, 2011) and reviews on the theme (Connell, 2012; Karpovich, 2010; Macionis & O’Connor, 2011). Finally, other studies examine very specific and unique topics within film tourism, such as the role of film festivals (Cudny, 2011), impacts on communities (Beeton, 2010) and the specific phenomena of celebrity spotting (Ricci, 2011) and anime tourism (Denison, 2010). More specific contributions of some of those works are fur- ther addressed on the presentation of the proposed model. Slum Tourism Tourist visits to poor areas with the objective of experiencing the place where poor people live is commonly referred to by the term poverty tourism (Burnett, 2014; George & Booyens, 2014; Nilima Achwal, 2010; Privitera, 2015; Whyte et al., 2011). However, Rolfes (2009) concludes that this is not an accurate term, arguing that slumming, further adopted by Steinbrink (2012) better represents the phe- nomenon. Completing the set of terms through which the phenomenon is described, slum tourism (Diekmann & Hannam, 2012; Dovey & King, 2012; Dürr, 2012; Dyson, 2012; Freire-Medeiros & Mene zes, 2013; Frenzel, 2014; Frisch, 2012; Meschkank, 2011; Steinbrink, 2013) is the most broadly accepted in academia, especially in the current decade. To understand why each author, as well as each journalist and other critics employ each term, a brief explanation of the different positions towards this activity is necessary. Slum tourism is marked by the controversy it emerges in different spheres. As pointed out by Freire-Medeiros (2009), critics concentrate in two aspects of slum tours: it’s supposed voyeuristic motives, and the post-colonial values intrin- sic to an activity where western tourists appropriate foreign spaces for egotistic reasons. On the voyeuristic dimension, some philosophers and journalists con- demn such tours for being a harmful way of voyeurism, often classifying them as a “poor people zoo”. In the academic sphere, it is argued that tourists might use their privilege to indulge their curiosity on other people’s misfortunes (Whyte et al., 2011). Criticizing the post-colonial and exploitative side of the activity, it is said that poverty tourism may lead tourists and promoters to the anesthetization of poverty, and thus to a depoliticized image that becomes attractive for capitalist exploitation (Dovey & King, 2012). Another preoccupation is that this same privi- lege may be used to negotiate goods and services with locals in an unfair way. In this regard, it is worth to highlight that poverty tourism is not necessarily pro-poor. The former refers to tourists activities where poverty is part of or the 152 return to the content page