collaboratively narrated conceptual and geographical placesOctober 7, 2010
I was reading an article
THE LONG TAIL OF DESTINATION IMAGE AND ONLINE MARKETING
Xiang (Robert) Li
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. xx, No. xx, pp. xxx–xxx, 2011
This paper talks of tagged images (so called ontological space for conceptions) and people’s destination in real geographical locations.
It is interesting from two aspects:
It makes me think that in ontological space your position is determined by the frequently perceived ontodimensions in the community (by yourself) and less frequently preferred additional ontodimensions. It may be imagined that there is one central ontological dimension (or plane) and additional dimensions (planes) that shift you in this multidimensional space to certain area in respect from the first plane.
Another interesting aspect is the relationship of conceptual spaces and positions with the real geographical locations and geopositions that people will choose.
The destination image phrases American travelers use to describe China follow the power-law distribution:
a few phrases or attractions are well-known to many of the respondents;
Top two phrases ‘‘Great Wall’’ and ‘‘Beijing.’’ The two terms contribute to almost half of the phrase volume; about 85% of respondents use at least one of these two.
These may be the most frequent ontodimensions?
b) hundreds of niche phrases are used very few times individually, but collectively they account for a large volume.
Here niche is used in the context of products determined for certain specific user-groups.
These are the additional dimensions that specify the ontoposition?
The distribution of stereotypical and affective image phrases follow both the 80-20 rule and the long tail pattern, if one defines the ‘‘head’’ as the top 10 phrases in the latter case.
The top 10 phrases cover more than 73% of total volume.
The general managerial contribution lies in the validation of the importance of niche products and market in the Internet age. Different ‘‘head’’ and ‘‘tail’’ sections of image phrases might be suitable for different marketing channels.
Notably, there is no apparent cutoff point which divides popular image phrases from niche ones depending on the marketing purpose, the choice of top attributes is
The most popular (i.e., the top 20%) phrases are vital since they represent the majority of tourists; however, it is unlikely that all those attributes could be promoted effectively.
To avoid diluting a brand’s identity or sending confusing brand messages, the positioning literature traditionally suggests destinations to focus on several key themes in their mass media marketing efforts.
This classic strategy accomplishes effectiveness by essentially compromising niche markets to more mainstream market.
The present study argues that such compromise is no longer valid in today’s environment and researchers, should pay more attention to those uncommon even obscure destination images: holders of the ‘‘tail’’ images are not only more knowledgeable about a destination, but also more likely to visit it.
A new segmentation approach might be employed based on the distinctiveness of
phrases the tourists type in. One can take full advantage of the aggregated niche markets.
In addition, providing more niche attractions and unique characteristics can also help alleviate the congestions in popular attractions and implicitly direct tourists to less visited areas.
In really such travel images are created by people who visit places, take images and tag images positioning them in the multidimensional ontological space defined certain dimensions. Thereby as a collaborative activity of many travellers certain ontopositions will be attached to certain geographical locations.
Frequent dimensions in ontological and geographical places, which are usually searched first will all also have associations with additional and less frequently percieved dimensions that can lead travellers to discover other ontopositions than initially they could define (and als visit the associated geographical locations).
There is one figure from another article about creating literary places, which i recently tried to elaborate from the point of view of collaboratively created literary places. I have just added some keywords that may be important to distinguish such as:
a) if literary place is associated with one writer’s story, the collaboratively narrated place is created by many individuals as part of their personal narratives
b) if the traditional literary place is a location that is described in the writer’s story, the new collaboratively narrated places are part of each individual’s narrative trajectory, and we may also find from these trajectories some narrative trajectory patterns
c) if a literary place from writer’s story is associated with emotions described in the story, or emotions that readers have experienced while reading the story, the new collaboratively narrated literary places are especially focusing on this second aspect – personal feelings, emotions will become associated with the place and with its representational images as tags, and the associations may be thus aggregated
d) literary places are also real geographical locations the writer has chosen, which may be geotagged, if cretian images and emotions are geotagged by many in the same location, this becomes an attractive geoposition
e) it is suggested to add facilities and services to this geographical location to introduce what is the association with the story. The collaboratively narrated places externalize the activity potentials of the place perceived and activated by many storytellers. These will be associated with the geographical location using the ontospacial plane (tag-dimensions). The embodiment of such activity potenentials will become possible in geographical locations.
f) the literary places are usually added in some tourist itineraries, which are certain geographical trajectories. The ontospacial additional space will enable to orientate and choose directions in the geographical place – the narrative trajectory of the crowd may be used for defining personal narrative trajectory and the trajectory in geographical space.
g) If usually the literary places are developed later after the novel becomes popular and remains unchanged in spite of visitors who come there, the collaboratively narrated places emerge and evolve and change dynamically in result of visitor interactions with the places.