Tourism, Security and Safety From Theory to Practice

Results of Newspaper Analysis
The results are presented in two phases: before and after the World Health
Organization (WHO) travel advisory since this was a major event in SARS-struck
Toronto. Not only did it have an impact on the willingness of both domestic and
international visitors to travel to Toronto, it came as a great surprise, and was
widely regarded as an inappropriate, even ridiculous international response, par-
ticularly as it came at a time when the number of incidences of SARS was in
decline and no new cases had been reported for a week.
From the first incidence of SARS in Toronto, there were substantial price cuts
and layoffs in an industry that was already ailing. They can be viewed as being part
of a recovery strategy and as attempts to make establishments more competitive.
They are not reported in detail here although they were widely reported in the
media and these reports added to the malaise.
Pre-WHO Travel Advisory
As indicated above, the first action that was taken with respect to tourism was to
release a letter from Toronto’s Medical Officer of Health in an attempt to allay
fears. This followed the cancellation of a major conference in early April.
On April 11 (GM), it was suggested in a report commissioned by the federal
government that they should provide $650 million in tax relief as part of a federal
program to cut fees (which would be passed on to passengers) to encourage flying.
However, this was not a totally new initiative, for the airlines were already strug-
gling prior to the onset of SARS. SARS simply made their plight more pressing.
On April 15 (GM), there was widespread criticism of the mayor and a call on
him to show leadership (although some questioned his ability to provide this). This
was done in response to travel advisories issued by several countries about visiting
Toronto and the outright ban some North American companies introduced on
employee travel to the city. The mayor returned from a trip to Florida and prom-
ised action, but, at the same time, said that there was little that could be done now
to promote the city and that “It’s not wise to throw good money after bad.”
In Toronto, where there is a large Chinese community, SARS was viewed by
many as being a Chinese disease. In order to support the Chinese community,
senior federal politicians (as well as various political candidates), including the
prime minister, were photographed eating in Chinatown in an attempt reduce fears
that bordered on racism.
On April 16 (GM), although officials from federal, provincial, and municipal
governments as well as the hotel and convention industry were meeting to devise
a response strategy, there was considerable criticism of lack of political leadership.
Recovering from SARS
147
H7898_Ch08.qxd 8/24/05 8:08 AM Page 147

---

The need to allay fears, instill confidence, launch promotions, and initiate a special
event (to bring people together, thereby indicating Toronto as being attractive and
safe) were suggested by industry spokespersons who lamented the lack of a figure
comparable to Mayor Rudolph Giuliani who had taken up the cause for New York
following September 11.
On April 19 (GM), a major article on SARS and tourism in Toronto was pub-
lished under the headline “From Hog Town [a nickname for Toronto] to Ghost
Town.” Part of this article reported an interview with Mike Rogers, President of the
advertising agency that had been hired to revive New York City following
September 11. He urged that the worst thing that could be done was to dwell on
the threat. Rather, he suggested that the goal should be to convey a spirit of opti-
mism. SARS should not even be mentioned. Advertising should show people
going about their lives and enjoying themselves—especially families with chil-
dren—for if people are taking their children, it will be assumed to be safe for all.
On April 23, a WHO travel advisory was announced advising against nonessen-
tial travel to Toronto in spite of the fact that there had been no new case of SARS
in Toronto for a week. Thus, a negative judgment was made against Toronto by an
international agency, and publicized globally. Even though the appropriateness of
their decision was widely questioned in Toronto, additional damage was done and
was very difficult to control.