Category: Uncategorised

The Importance of Sources

Continuing my theme of Tourism in the world of digital media and literacy, and in response to the week 8 topic of Curation, I wanted to talk about sources. Coming from a background that had me answering questions about the history and culture of my hometown, I have spent a lot of time trying to gather accurate and useful information for my purposes. And this has lead me to a couple of problems when dealing especially with indigenous history and culture.

To give some context, I am white. My parents are white, my grandparents are white, I am about as white as they come. As such, living in an indigenous community and working in a role in which I represent that community, I had to be exceptionally careful in how I presented and communicated about indigenous sites, history, and culture as ultimately I have no connection to these things. I will not pretend I was perfect in this position, however I always did my best to direct people to knowledgeable indigenous members of the community as these were simply better resources in certain issues than I am. However given that being able to direct visitors to more knowledgeable community members will not always be an option, we have to wonder what is the next best thing?

Nuxalk Mountain Goat Wool Robe, Cedar Bark Potlatch Hat, and Carved Speaker’s Staff features in the UBC Museum of Anthropology

In doing our project, my group has been aiming to feature whenever possible indigenous art. However one complication we ran in to early on in the process was attribution and usage rights. Given that the easiest art to legally use for project would be that in the public domain we would ideally be looking for some public domain indigenous art.

But that’s where the problem lies. According to the University of British Columbia “Effective December 30, 2022, the copyright for a work created in Canada will usually expire 70 years following the end of the calendar year in which the creator died.  However, for works where the last living author died on or before December 31, 1971, the previous copyright term (of 50 years after the end of the calendar year in which the author died) still applies.  Works that already entered the public domain prior to the enactment of the copyright term extension under the Copyright Act will remain in the public domain.” Furthermore, “If author(s) are unknown, then the work will enter the public domain: (a) 75 years after the end of the calendar year in which it was created; or (b) if the work was published prior to the end of such 75-year period, then the earlier of: (i) 75 years after the end of the calendar year in which it was first published, or (ii) 100 years after the end of the calendar year in which it was created.”

Unfortunately given these rules this means that in order for the art we feature to meet these criteria it must be to put it bluntly quite old. And unfortunately the reality of colonialism is that most of the art we have that is old enough to be in the public domain was stolen, coerced, or otherwise acquired illegitimately obtain from its rightful owners, in most cases without proper care to record the identities of who produced it.

Information Placard for the above 3 pieces

This presents difficulty not only in featuring and presenting these works ethically, but also in providing attribution of the pieces you present, especially once they lose the cultural context in which they were produced. Sometimes through familial connections we are able to regain some context, like in the Mountain Goat robe featured above which the UBC Museum of Anthropology has been able to trace to its original creator. However still others are simply attributed to “unknown weaver” or “unknown carver” as these connections and knowledge have been lost.

There is no simple answer to how to provide attribution and context in the world of indigenous art. However given that the unique art and cultures of British Columbia form such an integral part of our tourism industry, especially in small indigenous communities like my home town of Bella Coola, it is not one we can simply ignore. It is the responsibility of academics and educators alike to ensure that proper attribution and citation is given, and we must do our best with the resources we have.

Works Cited:
UBC Copyright: https://copyright.ubc.ca/public-domain/

Generative AI and its Impacts on Tourism

Continuing my rather unorthodox theme to this blog, I wanted to discuss the impacts of Generative AI on the tourism industry. As previously mentioned the topic of tourism, especially in British Columbia is one I have a lot of experience and knowledge in, and as such I wanted to bring that background in to this course in as many ways as possible in order to create a more interesting blog. For this week’s topic there is one particular angle I would like to approach when discussing the problems that can arise when using AI. That being how the production of materials can be used to mislead or otherwise misrepresent a given location.

Before we begin, I would also like to address that while I will try to approach this topic as neutrally as possible, I have a rather strong pre-existing bias against generative AI for artistic and practical reasons that I will not get in to at this time, and may colour how I represent or discuss it despite my efforts. Additionally as a disclaimer, for the sake of example there will be one instance of an AI generated photo in this post. This image was acquired using a simple google search and was not generated for by me or for the purposes of this post.

When discussing generative AI, the topic of AI art and image generation tends to be at the forefront. And I wanted to highlight something that has become increasingly common as a result. AI generated images in google searches. While in general I would argue prior to this the average google image search was never the best representation of a given location if one was looking for a place to visit or researching that city they heard about on TV. However recent advancements in AI and the proliferation of online publishing of these images has seen a rapidly growing number of such images presenting especially idealized depictions of popular destinations.

Above I presented two images side by side of the Vancouver Skyline as presented by googling that exact phrase and asked readers to guess which was generated by AI. To anyone familiar enough with common quirks of AI images, or the skyline of Vancouver, British Columbia the correct answer may have been obvious. The second image which appeared in an ordinary google search was in fact generated and posted by user Iftikhar Alam on Vecteezy. Conversely the first image which appeared in the same google search is instead a real photo of Vancouver’s waterfront and skyline taken by user bluejayphoto on iStockPhoto. But to one unversed in techniques to spot AI generated images, and/or someone unfamiliar with the location (such as a potential visitor researching the city) it is extremely easy to be misled.

A screenshot of Stanley Park taken from OpenStreetMap. The above photo was likely taken somewhere along the edge of Coal Harbour at bottom right.

One such complication is the tendency for AI generated images to incorporate elements from multiple depictions of a location with little regard for the material reality. There are 3 key “landmarks” in the AI generated photo which commonly appear in photos of Vancouver but which cannot all appear in a single photo due to simple geography. These are the skyline of Downtown Vancouver itself, the sailboats moored off Stanley Park, and the North Shore Mountains. And you’ll notice in the real image, only the former two are visible. To put it simply, in order to get a photo with both the moored sailboats, and the Vancouver skyline in frame, a photographer must be facing at least partly south and thus having no way to get the mountains to the north in frame. And yet in the AI depiction, all three of these are clearly visible when this is simply an impossible perspective.

While ultimately the misplacement of landmarks in what is effectively a composite of thousands of existing photos of a location does not reflect poorly on a location, the potential to mislead prospective visitors is present. Not only that, but the prevalence of these images in simple searches that are likely to be seen by those looking up a location for the first time creates difficulty in creating accurate expectations for potential visitors. While to some it may be easy to spot these images at a glance, to those of us that work in the tourism industry, we cannot expect all our customers and clients to have the same skills and tools we have to spot these misleading or inaccurate depictions. The prevalence of AI generated material in search engine results creates an unnecessary burden on the user to discern fact from reality.

Works Cited:
iStock Vancouver Skyline at Sunset by bluejayphoto: https://www.istockphoto.com/photo/vancouver-skyline-at-sunset-gm178388915-20368906
Vecteezy Vancouver Skyline AI by iftikharalam: https://www.vecteezy.com/photo/35758746-ai-generated-beautiful-cityscape-of-vancouver-at-sunset-british-columbia-canada-beautiful-view-of-downtown-vancouver-skyline-british-columbia-canada-ai-generated
OpenStreetMap: https://www.openstreetmap.org

© 2025 Digital Tourism

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑