Transformation as a result of digitization

Digitization is seen as the most important factor in the transformation of travel journalism, offering new opportunities and challenges: immediacy, ubiquity, multimedia capability, personalization, interactivity, hypertext narratives, encyclopedic capacity, and virtuality (^{Tejedor & Larrondo, 2008, p. 136}). In addition to hypertext, multimedia, and interactive options, the new technologies have also influenced the habits of readers, who now prioritize faster access, information that is shorter and more visual, a diversity of sources compared to traditional media, and who also want to participate in the communication process (^{Ulanova, 2014}). In this context, the media have to deal with a lack of interest from the audience (^{Paranko, 2016}), who are now able to obtain quality information quickly and at no cost (^{Pirolli, 2014}). This implies a greater responsibility on the part of journalists to be content curators who are responsible for offering verified, contrasted information, which helps readers guide themselves among the information “chaos” (^{Tejedor, 2012}).

The new technologies have broken the traditional monopoly of content production and distribution (^{Pirolli, 2014}; ^{Ulanova, 2014}). The ability of Web 2.0, or the social web (^{O’Reilly, 2005}) to allow the generation and sharing of content allows users and travelers to plan trips, share their experiences instantly with a wide audience, and react to stories published by others (^{Blanco, 2013}). The impact of the social web on the tourism industry (^{Miguéns et al., 2008}) has influenced the choice of other consumers as well (^{Hidalgo et al., 2014}), and it has turned travelers into “co-creators and users” before, during, and after a trip (^{Dediu, 2016}). Tejedor and Larrondo define travel-oriented cyber journalism as a specialization “that encompasses a travel story that might be produced by unknown citizens” (2008, p. 138).

The blog is the most prominent travel platform within Web 2.0, due to its extension, ease of use, autonomy, and proximity to the journalistic environment. As a result, content created by users has become a key source of information for others (^{Chen et al., 2014}), which has had a strong impact on their decisions (Lozanov, 2018). Added to these factors is the influence on purchase decisions that represent a significant volume of spending (^{Ting et al., 2014}). The direct intervention of travelers in the communicative process erodes the exclusive role of the expert (^{Calvi, 2010}) and raises the question of the status of the travel blogger compared to the travel journalist, two concepts with increasingly blurred borders (^{Goethals, 2013}). Authors such as Pokazanyeva warn of the risk of equating bloggers with professional journalists, the latter of which have education and experience, stressing that the professional travel journalist follows the journalistic principles of providing information, following ethical standards, and being responsible for the veracity of facts (^{Pokazanyeva, 2015}). The repercussions of giving erroneous information may be less damaging for bloggers, although they are not immune in terms of reputation or comments (^{Pirolli, 2014}).

In any case, amateur travel reporters have shaken the media’s status as the only source of information (^{Ulanova, 2014}), representing the greatest challenge for travel journalism as a profession, according to ^{Hanusch and Fürsich (2014)}, In fact, with the rise of free online content, the market for traditional travel magazines has diminished over the last decade. The dual crisis involving both the financial realm and business model affecting the media has not only caused the closure of some magazines, but has also led traditional magazines to explore opportunities offered by the Web, such as digital versions of their periodicals (^{García Marín, 2017}).

Advantages and challenges of digitization

The journalists interviewed acknowledge the advantages of digitization, but are mostly critical of the consequences in some cases. Pancorbo highlights the possibility of sending reports and photographs instantly, while questioning the need for such speed in travel journalism: “So much immediacy, for what?” As Calaf warns, instead of “having technology at the service of journalism”, nowadays “journalism is being put at the service of technology”. As pointed out by interviewees Belenguer and Nadal, digitization has “democratized” access to travel journalism, especially for young professionals, thanks to the development of an infrastructure that opens up new destinations, accessibility to travel, photography and video technology, and services such as online translators, according to Kubatian.

Nadal is convinced that travel journalism is “infinitely better now”, since “there have never been so many options for telling stories”. Tejedor emphasizes the opportunity to carry out “much better documentation” on the ground, as well as to narrate in multimedia, crossmedia, and transmedia formats. This journalist and researcher doubts that we read on screen less than on paper. The audience just “reads in a different way, and behaves differently”, a factor that encourages reflection and invites us to “offer content that adapts to it”. Chérnikova argues that readers consume diverse information “at a very high speed” from various sources (text, video, photos, and audio). Therefore, in order to keep the magazines afloat, access options must be diversified instead of reducing the amount of information. Rastegáyeva stresses that young people today “are a generation who are more visual than an information consumer”, and they navigate “through Instagram images”, so reporters have to adapt to this change.

Bernadas admits that the Internet is a “great” tool, while highlighting that “digital products related to the world of travel have proliferated exorbitantly”. He warns of “a lot of digital garbage” with “unprofessional texts and photographs”, which hinders the profitability of quality digital products. “In this context, you can write the most incredible article, but it is very likely to be lost among all this stuff, because they just won’t find it”, Kubatián emphasizes.

Travel journalism in Spain and Russia: quality, topics, and trends

Professionals from Spain and Russia believe that the literary quality of journalistic travel texts has decreased. Nadal believes this is due to the fact that the public does not appreciate quality writing: “They don’t want to read four pages: they want a good photo and a short text”, the journalist argues.

Puértolas asserts that travel journalism is moving away from its literary side, while López attributes this trend to the influence of the Internet, with shorter texts, expanded practical guides that are transferred to the web, and a “less literary, more direct, less informative” style. Yakovina indicates that the Internet “sets a completely different rhythm of information consumption”. “Our texts have become much more dynamic: a person should be able to immediately immerse herself in the action, in some details”, the journalist emphasizes. Zhelezniak believes that “long, complicated texts” are acceptable, but with limits. In other words, “you have to clearly understand” how much information can be included, and “where it is necessary to stop”. In this regard, Apresov confirms that the quality of texts “is decreasing” and the audience “is starting to be led by the simplified, practical style of bloggers”.

One of the main influences can be seen in the headlines, which is linked to the way in which readers search for information. While in the past, headlines were chosen according to the rules of good journalism, yet now it is done “so that Google can find you”, as Nadal points out. Another example, according to this journalist, is clickbait headlines, designed to create expectations and compel readers to go in. Kubatian speaks of a “headline war”, where the important thing “is to make people click”, with lists or recommendations that have a “categorical” tone, as indicated by Konstantinova.

Contrary to this popular trend toward reducing links to literature and adapting to Internet language, Chernikova praises the literary quality of the articles and authors in her magazine. Likewise, Telnov attests that he does not adapt the texts in his magazine, because the consumer buys it to read it, and she or he “is willing to make an effort”. Rastegayeva points out that these new canons apply more to digital journalism, while indicating that few magazine publications prefer “higher quality reports”.

The Internet and the development of tourism have influenced the topics and destinations to which the magazines dedicate their reports, although they continue to focus on classic destinations, according to interviewees from both countries. Ruiz points out that both, now and in the past, trips have to be, and have had to be, “doable”, and have focused on certain “iconic places on the planet”.

An important factor in the selection of destinations is the infrastructure, especially the airlines, as Uribarri explains. Thus, he points out that low-cost airlines have opened up new destinations, including many cities “that no one knew” before, which must be added to the mix. On the other hand, “if they suddenly stop flying to a certain destination, it is more difficult to recommend it”. In addition to “small places that people are discovering little by little”, his magazine continues to pay attention to “classic destinations”, exotic places, and adventure trips. Chernikova confirms that they are trying to include “all destinations” in each issue of L’Officiel Voyage, in order to make it “multidirectional”, and she recognizes “the difficulty of talking about famous places in a different way, or in other words, finding an angle to make it look different”. Yakovina shares this idea, explaining that if they write about a common destination, they choose to include less obvious information, although National Geographic Traveler has not abandoned classic themes.

Popov states that his magazine focuses on providing practical information that is difficult to find elsewhere, and he adds that “each text has its own style, its own role, and its own task”. For her part, Rastegayeva emphasizes that the situation in Russia and its relationship with other countries is a factor that influences the topics of the travel media. “Luxury content now annoys many” readers, and themes about the United States “have been removed from all print magazines” in Russia: “We don’t write about it now: it’s an unspoken order, but no one wants to upset anyone with such content”, Rastegayeva argues.

Generally speaking, the interviewees perceive a less in-depth, more commercial approach in current travel journalism, which is a style that “loses its quality” and independence. Nadal points out trips paid for by tourist offices or interested companies. Russian journalists share the criticism of having too close a relationship with the tourism industry. Telnov explains that “press tours do not help” the profession, because “the journalist must write what the company that organizes the trip will like, so journalism has turned into public relations”. Zhelezniak conclusively maintains that “travel journalism in Russia is nearly non-existent”, and that very few people are capable of writing quality texts.

Tejedor believes it has fallen “into a very homogenizing dynamic”, with the “same vision of the same places full of clichés and stereotypes”. Ortín argues that the so-called “travel journalism” has been “hijacked by the tourism industry” and has become a tool of “pseudo-advertising promotion”, which implies a loss of respect for readers. He underscores the fact that Altaï̈r has adhered to “deontology and journalistic ethics”, and summarizes the magazine’s credo as “culture from travel, and chronicles from journalism”, in order to “tell the attractive complexity of the planet”. Belenguer notes a trend toward “superficial journalism” in order “to sell tourist destinations”, a tendency that is even more pronounced in the digital world, although he points out that journalism involving “serious, in-depth, high-quality reporting” has survived, which is an idea shared by Puértolas.

Competition with travel blogs and the adaptation of magazines

The emergence of blogs has marked a turning point in travel journalism. Most of the criticism points to the lack of professionalism and low quality of the content, as asserted by Chernikova. “There is a lot of desire, interest and goodwill, but a terrible lack of knowledge”, Ortín says. López doubts the potential of bloggers without a journalistic background, an opinion shared by Belenguer, who expresses that a travel blog can serve as a “business card”, yet it is not a journalistic product. In the opinion of Popov and Yakovina, it is “a completely different genre”.

The scope of the blog is limited to a personal format which, on occasion, is far from the requirements of journalism, even when carried out by professionals: “They tell their personal battles, and that’s not journalism”, Belenguer emphasizes, while stressing that journalists “have to tell what happens to others”, not what happens to themselves. Uribarri points out that the absence of verified information is the biggest problem with blogs, a reality that Tejedor confirms by explaining that although the information they provide may be “valid” and interesting, “it does not have the essence of a journalistic commitment”. Similarly, Yakovina indicates that a blogger has “less responsibility than a print magazine” and does not pay as much attention to information verification. Popov points out the multiple errors that are made due to this reason. Pancorbo summarizes his point of view with an analogy: “Do you want to be operated on by a healer with the laying on of hands or by an expert surgeon in a hospital with good conditions?”

Calaf warns of “a lot of toxic information”, and of travel blogs influenced “by advertising and commercial interests”. Regarding the criticism of paid posts and sponsored trips, Nadal believes that bloggers “do more or less the same as magazines have always done”, and believes “it is a problem of the profession in general, and not of the Internet”. In fact, he believes that blogs include “much more criticism and much more personal reasoning than could have been included on paper in the past”. “Even though they are not completely free, there are more possibilities to say what they think”, he says. Rastegayeva, who is also a journalist and blogger, agrees that both styles represent travel journalism, although a blog always has a “more author-centered” approach and language, while magazines “adhere to the classic canons of journalism”. Nadal attributes the criticism of blogs to corporatism: “Whoever says that a blog is not travel journalism, or is not worthy of the name, has not understood anything”. “We sell chronicles, not paper”, and we have to be “where people communicate”.

Both Golovatiuk and Aprésov recognize the competition and the “threat” that blogs pose to magazines, although the former believes that major advertisers are continuing to work with large publishers. Both Russian and Spanish journalists have the same view regarding the situation of traditional travel magazines. López has made a tally of “several crises”, including the economic one and the one caused by the Internet. Ruiz underscores a generational change as well: “Young people read magazines less”. Popov confirms that the Internet has “devoured” all but the largest, most veteran magazines, and predicts that the market may shrink even more as advertisers focus on digital platforms.

Added to the difficulties above are those resulting from the political situation in Russia. Telnov mentions that sanctions following the Ukrainian crisis have caused the closure of publications, while Golovatiuk points out the legal prohibition of alcohol and tobacco advertising in magazines, as well as the closure of sales points.

As for the future of travel publications in print, Pancorbo hopes that “paper will not be completely cornered, because it is irreplaceable”. He argues that for this not to happen, the paper format has to attract readers “by increasing its quality”. Puértolas argues that traditional magazines can “combine perfectly” and coexist with the information offered by the Internet, if they assume that their role is not that of a “practical guide”, but rather of reading. Belenguer believes that “the smartest thing” that magazines can do is to adapt to the moment and make a product that “is partly present in the paper world, and partly located in the digital world”.

Tejedor advocates “searching for new strategies” and reflecting on format type, a business model that works, and the audience. The great challenge, according to this journalist, is “to experiment with new formats for reporting about trips, which must be interactive, horizontal, and dialogic; not only multimedia, but transmedia as well”. From the business model perspective, and “contrary to the gratuity of the Internet, which does not work”, we must think of “paid or hybrid formulas”, and “rethink the product to adapt to the way users approach it”. This researcher holds the view that a boutique product, “either by the cost of the material, or by the type of content, is the product that works”. Nadal predicts that paper magazines will continue to exist “as a niche, as one more thing among a select group”, and he suggests choosing “high quality, knowing that they will have a small but very loyal audience”, an opinion shared by Konstantínova, who proposes the idea of the magazine as a luxury item that is “collectible, and something you can give to someone else”.

Chernikova mentions “the aesthetic pleasure of reading” with regard to a printed text as a potential advantage over the Internet. Yakovina is optimistic about the survival of onboard magazines. Moreover, Rastegáyeva and Chernikova agree that an airplane “is the only place where magazines are actually read”, at least as long as people “are forbidden to use their mobile phones during the flight”, Popov notes. The most pessimistic voices allude to the fact that magazines continue to exist “for older people”, as pointed out by Telnov, while Apresov considers that “the future belongs to electronic media, both free and paid”.

The profile of the travel journalist 2.0

The proliferation of the Internet and technology has greatly changed the profile of the travel journalist 2.0. The first aspect to highlight is freelance work, which has facilitated access to this profession, as asserted by Nadal. “We are in a very rich scenario, with many journalists who have found a way to build, prepare and sell their stories related to trips”, says Tejedor. Both Spanish and Russian interviewees confirm that “all magazines” combine regular collaborations with new voices (Yakovina). They also highlight the commitment to “incorporate local people”. “Rather than send a person to do a report, it’s easier for you to contact someone in China who will write the report for you”, López explains. Ortín links the incorporation of local voices with the concept of “decoloniality”, since “the best-told story is the story of an insider”, and you have to “propose a dialogue to know the world”. Chernikova confirms that L’Officiel Voyage works “a lot” with insiders, but clarifies that they “act somewhat like informants, or as sources of information” for the authors, because “the ability to narrate is rare”.

The second key point for the new generations is digital excellence, as they are skilled in the use of these tools, yet without forgetting “analog, starting with a paper book, languages, culture, knowing how to write and refine, and the gift of communication”, as Pancorbo points out. In this regard, Nadal insists that while maintaining the usual requirement (“write well and know how to tell stories”), another of the great changes is multi-functionality. “You have to know how to use all the tools: a bit of video, photos, software; how to handle the tools; how to address the public; and you have to know the tricks of social networks. Now you are a one-man or one-woman show”. However, continues Nadal, along with this multidisciplinary requirement, the journalist has to be an “ultra-specialist” in a subject, which turns the travel freelance writer into “a kind of Superman”, states Belenguer.

Chérnikova adds that “a good journalist is also a good writer; he knows how to interview and ask the right questions, speaks different languages, and has other talents and abilities”. In addition, Kubatian points out that the modern economic system forces him or her to become a private entrepreneur, so “a journalist cannot be just a journalist”, but has to find ways to be a vendor of his or her product, and be “a seller, along with many other professions”.

Thirdly, the journalist’s viewpoint and capacity for analysis are fundamental. “What you look at, what catches your attention, and what you narrate, which others do not narrate”, is what constitutes the main value, says López. Ruiz emphasizes that he prefers a text that is “somewhat authored”, with “the maximum density of information possible, a bit emotional, and that tells you why a site is special”. Uribarri emphasizes the importance of using travel recommendations that “cannot be found on the web”, in order to give “a special touch” to the text. This implies carrying out “investigative, explanatory, descriptive, and prescriptive work”, in addition to “writing well, even if the topic is limited, by including information that is entertaining and informative”.

Moreover, prior documentation is also essential, as Chérnikova points out. “An author prepares for the trip and works on the process, even more so afterwards”, she explains. Bernadas shares an opinion regarding the need to have things documented, and to read what was done before, in order to have “a calmer view”. “We need people with a critical perspective, documentation, and a comprehensive view, with respect and a desire to ask”. Similarly, Tejedor points out that “in a society of infoxication, of noise”, where there is “too much content”, people are looking for journalists “who give an authentic, genuine, more elaborate vision”.