Bull City Mutterings

BALANCING SPECIAL INTERESTS

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:45:00 +0000

I’ve been involved in what is called “destination marketing” nearly my entire adult life with the exception of six college years (two of which were involved in marketing a “campus community.”)

Destination marketing is by definition, “visitor centered marketing of a community for economic and cultural development while balancing the interests of visitors, businesses, other organizations and local government.”

It is the “balancing part” that is both the most challenging and often least appreciated. Of course “tourism” is “used” by many as a rationale but that doesn’t mean they really care or even understand tourism or what it means to market a community as a whole.

And then there are the businesses, organizations and facilities that are both woven into a community’s overall story and then have the opportunity to harvest the yield. I rarely run into a theater, museum, ballpark, historic site, arts group, downtown booster, convention facility, restaurant, shopping center, government official or regional or state interest that feels DCVB fully appreciates them or that we do enough for them or that they get enough of our attention.

It is natural for them to believe they play or should be given a more prominent role…it is also natural for those of us truly involved in weaving and telling the overall community story to worry that the story might be undermined by fragmentation or event cannibalization.

Balancing interests, indeed.

EVENT CANNIBALIZATION

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 14:00:00 +0000

We have a dilemma in our community. On the upside, we have more signature festivals and events than communities much larger. We’re also fortunate they have earned national reputations and leverage the Durham brand.

There are some members of our community though, who are intrigued with securing more and more events. I don’t think it is that they don’t value the events we have. They just don’t realize how fragile festivals are.

You see, festivals compete. Not with one another as much as they compete for time slots, underwriting and sponsorship, volunteers, locations, media attention and audience with all of the other leisure options both residents and visitors have here.

What Durham needs to do is worry more about how to make existing festivals and events sustainable, not recruiting new ones. A lot of communities have generic events…or events so ubiquitous that they don’t add to a community’s distinctiveness.

My opinion and the opinion of the Durham Convention & Visitors Bureau is that as a community we need to focus on retaining and making our existing events better as well as protecting them as much as possible from the events from the United States of Generica.

DAMNED BY FAINT PRAISE – HELL NO--INVISIBLE!

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:05:00 +0000

Maps like this are why so many people are confused about the location of Research Triangle Park. This world class business park for research and development is located 4 miles from Downtown Durham, nestled in SE Durham County and encompassed on three sides by the City of Durham.

Yet this map places it only in the Southeastern United States. Durham isn’t even on the map but Raleigh, two towns away from RTP, is shown, giving the impression the Park is in Raleigh.

It isn’t one of those things like they only had room for the large cities. Winston-Salem, a city smaller than Durham in the last census is on the map, but not Durham.

It isn’t done to intentionally slight Durham, but the result is the same. No wonder people get confused. More to come…

ARE WE STILL IN HIGH SCHOOL?

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 12:50:00 +0000

I’ve noted before that a friend of mine once told me that “politics is personal, not logical.” And maybe that’s what the news media has become. I know reporters always seem more interested in the anecdotal than generalizable. That’s why it only takes one comment now on a blog or listserv to spawn a news story, e.g. “activists are concerned.”

But have you listened to the news coverage of the Democratic National Convention? It’s just like high school. “She really doesn’t like him!” “She was ambiguous.” “She didn’t apologize.” “She raised money for him but he didn’t for her.” “Inside sources tell me...”

All that’s missing is “he hurt her feelings.” Geezzz! Isn’t there something on which to report that is more substantive than that? And whatever happened to verifying fact? No wonder politics is personal.

AN ECONOMIC PLAN FOR CIVIL RIGHTS

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:34:00 +0000

A hundred years ago, two African American gentleman with differing viewpoints spawned two different movements to achieve racial equality. They were both frequent visitors to Durham.

The two leaders, of course, were Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. Dubois. One argued for equality through economic development and the other through social change. From reports at the time, it seemed they didn’t always get along and people seemed to take sides on the issues. But one thing was clear: there was a tolerance of ideas, debate and public discourse evident then.

In Durham, at the dawn of the 1900’s a group of African American leaders appear to have fused a both/and approach adapting parts of both movements. It was then that Black Wall Street was spawned, the Sit-In Movement took root in the basements of Durham churches, and organizations like the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People were formed.

Sometimes it is hard to tell if that same tolerance for ideas or fusion of ideas still exists across the United States. I remember the puzzling and seemingly intolerant reaction to Dr. Shelby Steele’s The Content of Our Character and his more recent book, White Guilt. And similarly to Bill Cosby’s 2005 speech at Howard University.

I’m now reading a new book recommended by friend and colleague Bill Geist, written by one of his former Board members, Dr. John Yancy Odom. It is very insightful and full of useful ideas that I’ll leave for you to read for yourself.

But I wonder if his Saving Black America; An Economic Plan for Civil Rights will receive the same response as Dr. Steele’s books or if the inspiration of Presidential Candidate Barack Obama will lead us back to the positive and open debate about racial equality that Washington and Dubois had.

CULTURAL COST/BENEFIT DESERVES THE SAME STANDARD APPLIED TO AMERICAN TOBACCO

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:04:00 +0000

When Tom Bonfield (new Durham City Manager) and I got a chance for extended conversation during his first week on the job, we touched on something I’ve mentioned before. I got the impression he agreed and will take it into consideration.

Currently, when local government annually reports the performance of a cultural facility or event, a very narrow definition of cost and revenue is reported. Even though these quality of life facilities were never intended to pay for themselves, it minimized their impact to not show revenue leveraged by more than the revenues generated inside the facility.

When local government invests in a public/private venture like adaptive reuse of the huge American Tobacco Complex, it takes a what appears to be a much better approach and compares not only revenue specific to the three parking decks or the Ballpark or soon the new theater but also the spending and property taxes leveraged by ATC’s increased value and those investments, public and private.

To me, it has makes sense to treat cultural facilities the same way. The sales tax alone generated by visitor spending surrounding use of the Civic Center or Museum of Life or Science or Carolina Theater or Full Frame Documentary Film Festival, is far greater than what is spent just inside the facility or event. Not to mention the increase they spur in surrounding property values.

When DCVB analyzes these facilities, the full impact of the facility on generating tax revenues is applied, not just the revenue generated at the door. We hope we can work with City and County officials to apply a consistent standard.

UTILITY & PITFALLS OF ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSES

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 19:39:00 +0000

DCVB has Global Insight periodically quantify the impact of visitors on Durham. In July a panel at a conference discussed an article in the Journal of Travel Research entitled, "Economic Impact Studies; Instruments for Policitical Shenanigans."

I've distilled out below some points maded in the article along with some comments by Ken McGill, an EVP for Global Insight:

Six Reasons Economic Impact Studies are Best Practice:

Assessing return on investment (ROI) from tourism promotion and infrastructure investment.
Monitoring and benchmarking performance vs. destination competitors.
Setting priorities for economic development and infrastructure.
Determining whether concession or sponsorship requests for events/attractions/meetings are worth it.
Informing public policy decisions including those involving tax burdens.
Informing and reporting to residents and other stakeholders.

Analysis like this also informs answers to these 5 questions:

Is the community spending enough on both tourism promotion and infrastructure and do revenues generated cover costs?
Which are best economic development targets and are concessions worth it?
What is the ROI on public tourism capital investment and government support?
How can we benchmark against destination competitors?
How is the full value of tourism communicated to policy makers, businesses and residents?

Pitfalls to Avoid:

Including resident spending in the impact.
A sponsor that shops for a study that will confirm what they want to hear.
Multipliers being used without netting out leakage.
Vendors who never tell communities what they don’t want to hear.
Communities or developers that hide studies supporting the other side of the story.

CLARIFICATION OF “REGRESSIVE” AS APPLIED TO TAXATION

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 18:23:00 +0000

An economist posted the following on the Bull City Rising blog. It is an excellent clarification of a term that is used loosely by lay folks:

I'm not taking a side on whether the prepared meal tax is a good idea or not. But as an economist who studies poverty and inequality, I was surprised to see the tax described as regressive.

A regressive tax is one in which lower-income people pay a higher proportion of their income towards the tax than do higher income people. According to the Consumer Expenditures Survey, households in the bottom quintile of the income distribution (who average $9,974 in income) spend 5.2% of their income on "food away from home" (the CEX category that approximates "prepared meals"). The next quintile (average income: $26k) spends 5.5%. The third quintile (average income: $45k) spends 5.8%, and the fourth quintile (average income $71k) spends 5.9%. For the highest-income 20% (average income $151k), the percent drops back down to 5.4%, but is still above the percent of income spent by the poorest group. You can see the numbers here: http://www.bls.gov/cex/2006/share/quintile.pdf

So by the traditional definition, this is a--slightly--progressive tax. Of course, exempting the first $8 of the meal, as someone suggested, would certainly make it more progressive.

The other question I was curious about is, how progressive is this tax compared to the other main means of revenue-raising in Durham, the property tax? A look at the same table, on the line for "housing expenditures," reveals the following [note that economists believe that renters also pay property tax, because landlords raise rents proportionally when property taxes rise]:

Bottom quintile: 39.8%; second quintile: 36.3%; third quintile: 34.3%; fourth quintile: 33.1%; top quintile: 31.9%.

Since the share of income spent on housing falls dramatically with income, while the share spent on food away from home rises slightly, a prepared food tax is significantly more progressive than a property tax. (It's also much more progressive than an overall sales tax, which is highly regressive.)

None of this is to say that the proposed tax in this case is a good or bad idea--but it's not regressive, either absolutely or in comparison to other means at Durham's disposal for revenue-raising.

Post to Bull City Rising Blog

NEGATIVE WORD OF MOUTH

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:39:00 +0000

A journalist down the road in Raleigh jumped all over me once for using the term “virulent” to describe a small part of the population there and in other surrounding communities who drive negative word of mouth (NWOM) about Durham.

vir·u·lent (vîr y -l nt, vîr -)

2.Bitterly hostile or antagonistic; hateful: virulent criticism. See Synonyms at poisonous.

3. Intensely irritating, obnoxious, or harsh.

But I’m hardly the first person to use the term in regard to NWOM or for that matter, word of mouth in general.

For years we’ve been tracking the origins of an underlying current of negativity about Durham reported by both visitors and newcomers.

First, surveys were used to rule out Durham residents as the source or genesis of the negativity.

We’ve also confirmed that while reports of the negativity are widespread, it is actually fueled by a relatively small, 10-12%, of the adult population.

Early on our collaborator, Catevo Group, ruled out the news media as the source, explaining that “while journalists are exposed to the same negativity in their every-day lives, and it may seep into content through tone or headlines, members of the media are more often victimized or contaminated than they are the source.
We also learned early on that no amount of advertising can “out-gun” the power of negative word of mouth. It takes a far more intricate and sophisticated approach of playing up positives while empowering people who are positive with information to confront water-cooler fables. This presents what blogger Gordon Hotchkiss calls a moral hazard and that is the biggest inhibition to negative word of mouth…risk of looking stupid.

NWOM artists want to be seen as “in the know” and they appeal as Hotchkiss blogged late last year in Out of My Gord, to “the darker side of nature of human nature 0f building oneself up at the expense of others.”
We’ve isolated the population who are “carriers” and volunteer negativity about Durham around the “water cooler” and to visitors and newcomers. Research reveals both the carriers and the sources are largely located in nearby communities and the origin seems internal because so many people commute from those communities to Durham to work.
Finally, we’ve narrowed the carriers down to slightly more than 1 to 1.5 out of every 10 adults. They are the ones you read gratuitously trashing Durham online with comments at the end of news stories or in blogs and in chat rooms.

Amazing how much economic damage so few people can wreak.

DOUBLE STANDARD CAN SUBTLY UNDERMINE A COMMUNITY'S IMAGE AND IDENTITY

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:06:00 +0000

Coverage of this story involving Durham by two news outlets based in nearby Raleigh, NC provides a perfect example of what I mean by imbalance.

Both stories cover the same topic and both are technically accurate. Both written by good reporters. But one reveals the Durham MSA has surpassed the Raleigh-Cary MSA and the other skits that observation by focusing attention only Raleigh-Cary’s percentage of growth. percentage.

http://localtechwire.com/business/local_tech_wire/news/story/3345138/

http://www.newsobserver.com/business/story/1169137.html

Of course you may be wondering if perhaps the one outlet tended to always cover stories about rankings that way. But if you check out this story from the same paper a week earlier you’ll see that’s not the case. http://www.newsobserver.com/news/wake/raleigh/story/1156398.html

Not only is the Raleigh ranking heralded in both headline and stories, this reporter took some things I was saying about Durham’s rankings (such as the statement I made about feelings of superiority leading to complacency) and used them out of context as if I somehow was bitter that Raleigh had received recognition.

The reporter also failed to correct my revelation to him that the early ‘90’s ranking he attributes to Raleigh was really one given to 6 counties and more than a dozen cities and towns including Durham. Maybe he missed that point or maybe an editor thought it muddied the story.

My only beef is that had the story been troubling, it would have emphasized Durham as the location while skirting or generalizing the location if Raleigh was the location such as the troubling event such as happened recently with coverage of a huge gang riot at a mall there. Just compare that to coverage of events at malls in Durham where attribution is not only specific to Durham but repeated.

We’ve consistently been told by the Raleigh paper, repeated by the Raleigh AP office that by policy they seldom acknowledge the location of very positive stories emanating from SE Durham, the location of Research Triangle Park. They claim these are “regional stories.” They may be regional, state, national or international in interest, but the fact is they occur in Durham.

Can you can imagine the outcry if Durham began referring to the “State Capital" separate from Raleigh just because it has “regional or state” significance?

All any community can ask is that attribution be consistent and accurate and the standards applied equally from community to community, regardless of whether the content of a story is positive or troubling.

WHEN COMMUNITY BRANDS FAIL

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:55:00 +0000

There are two sure-fire signals a new community brand signature isn’t going to work. And they both involve residents or local stakeholders more than external audiences.

One is when the universal “peanut gallery” reaction (e.g., my baby sister can draw one better than that) fuels on itself rather than subsides. The other is when no one says anything at all, e.g., it just doesn’t resonate…it isn’t memorable.

With all of the scientific research tools available, it still comes down to that one word…resonate. If after deployment, it doesn’t resonate with stakeholders who live and breathe a community and deliver on the brand day in and day out, you’re in big trouble but have lots of company.

It is natural that brand signatures have to grow on you. It’s change, and folks typically don’t jump up and down in excitement about change, except in the current election. But if in a short time a brand signature doesn’t start to grow on people, it’s DOA.

But a real sign things are going in the right direction is 1) when organizations and individuals in your community want to link to it or use it and 2) when community leaders and news editors begin to cite it.

Most people make the mistake of believing a brand is the art work. Actually a signature is just a highly distilled way to remind people of the brand or bring it to their attention.

Saying the signature is the same as a brand is like saying your new hair cut defines your personality. Nope, at least not for long.

Durham gets a lot of credit for 1) attempting not only to distill a brand but an infinitely more complex overarching brand, one that will give all messengers a common voice and 2) introducing a lot of science into the process at least into destination community brands.

But we’re also very, very fortunate that less than two years since deployment that community leaders are regularly using it in conversation and speeches, more than 300 businesses, organizations and individuals are showcasing it, surveys confirm it already has recognition and acceptance by 80% of residents and finally, it made its way onto the editorial pages, the toughest group of all.

ODD COUPLE – SUPPLY AND DEMAND

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:28:00 +0000

Supply and demand has never been as simple as it was in those micro/macro economics classes in college. It is true that for the most part supply follows demand.

But there are instances where small shifts in demand follow changes in supply. I don’t mean the inscrutable world of oil prices right now where the principles of supply and demand and price seem disconnected.

I’m also not referring to the overly simplistic “build it and they will come” crowd responsible for so much overbuilding and churn.

I’m talking more about what I learned years ago when airlines were regulated. People in my position worked with airlines and community leaders to secure new routes between city pairs from the Federal Government. I learned something then from an airline executive that I assume is true.

When a new carrier is added to a city pair, even though the existing carrier may be flying that route at far less than capacity, there will be a small increase in the number of people flying the route, regardless of fare changes.

Still, it’s a little puzzling that additional people would jump on a plane at the same fare, just because more seats were available. Some of it brand related, e.g. airline preferences. Some related to more exposure to the fact the route existed at all which includes destination marketing, etc.

Now friend and fellow blogger Bill Geist reports on a PKF analysis that predicts that if the 10% announced reduction in airline seats becomes a reality, it will also cause a 3.9% decrease in hotel occupancies. I haven’t read the report but I can imagine it is due to more sell outs, the hassles that come with a full flight, higher fares as seats because scarce and a shift of leisure travelers in particular to other forms of transportation.

As Bill notes, we’re in for a bumpy ride when it will seem as it does with the price of oil, that no one is piloting the plane.

ADF IS WORTH ITS WEIGHT IN GOLD

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:36:00 +0000

We’re spoiled in Durham. Sure we have to work extra hard to overcome the underlying current of negativity driven by some negative word of mouth artists in nearby communities and counties.

But my theory is a lot of that negativity is sheer envy with a little intolerance mixed in, and a dash of ignorance. Durham has arguably more going for it than any place in this State and for its size nationwide.

Look at the accolades for proof…community as a whole, healthcare facilities and practitioners, universities, research parks, musicians, hotels, dancers, museums, restaurants, historic preservation…the list is overwhelming.

Leveraging them as part of telling the Durham story is an obvious “must.” But there needs to be more. We need to find ways to help these things continue to thrive and reach new levels of excellence.

Some of them can’t relocate but some can. We can’t take any of them for granted, let alone assume excellence is guaranteed. Gems like ADF can disappear in a heartbeat, as can Full Frame Documentary Film Festival to name just two. Putting on a festival like these is a full time job for scores of people. Durham needs to make it easier for them to secure sponsorship.

The payoff when told as part of the Durham story is publicity like this article in the New York Times, one of several during the season.

Pure gold!

The Big 2-0

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:52:00 +0000

In five months the Durham Convention & Visitors Bureau will turn 20. The governing board commenced January 17, 1989 when the late H.C. Cranford called the meeting to order and then began to search to find me as Chief Executive. This anniversary will particularly be meaningful and fun to celebrate.

Durham commenced destination marketing an average of 20 to 30 years later than its competition. But several strategies have helped us close some of the gaps in what they call “share of mind.”

One was aggressively deploying technology. Another was deploying research driven decisions and a wide range of performance measures right from the get-go. And maybe most important, adopting the credo of “continuing and never-ending improvement” and innovation.

We’re hard on ourselves at DCVB and that’s part of the culture…but I can tell you we’ll come up for air and do some celebrating when DCVB turns 20.

COMMUNITIES ARE IRRELEVANT?

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:54:00 +0000

I was told recently by an influential person that anyone who has moved to Durham or other communities in the Triangle after I did nearly 20 years ago doesn’t care about cities, just the region. I think they were trying to hurt my feelings:)

Seriously, one of the crucial elements of community marketing is to keep track of how residents characterize where they live because one of the first principles of marketing is don’t market a brand you can’t deliver. That’s why we encourage people to reserve the term Raleigh-Durham as the name of the jointly owned airport. When it comes to destination communities, there simply is “no such place.”

In the mid ‘90’s, DCVB picked up a question that a newspaper and television station first asked in the early ‘90’s on a survey and had polling professionals repeated it periodically.

Even though 40% of Durham’s population is new to the community since 1990, people continue to have very close ties to the community’s identity. In the scientific poll taken this past May/June, nearly 80% characterize where they live by the city or county of Durham and only just a little over 20% use the region or Triangle as one big area. The percentage has hardly varied and other survey questions have confirmed over the years that even people who think of the region, don’t define it as one big area but as a series of distinct communities.

It isn’t just Durham either. The percentage of people in Orange County preferring a specific city or town or county to characterize where they live is 77% and in Wake County 76%. This doesn’t mean of course that people aren’t proud of the Triangle or the State or the Southeastern United States or the US of A. It just means that when it comes to where people live, communities are communities and they are still very relevant.

None of this fazes those who hope by sheer repetition to argue otherwise though. I think they are caught in the trap of arguing that communities must be irrelevant in order for the region to be relevant, kind of either/or thinking. But those of us in destination community marketing must base decisions on sound research vs. force of will.

WHY DURHAM WANTS A 1% PREPARED FOOD LEVY

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:29:00 +0000

As with anything political, this is bound to get a little convoluted over the next few months.

Durham won approval yesterday from the General Assembly to hold a voter referendum on a 1% levy on prepared food. DCVB did some heavy lifting on this over a 17 year period so there has been oodles of discussion and consensus. So why did we take so long after Raleigh/Wake County, Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Dare, Fayetteville/Cumberland and even the little town of Hillsborough assessed this levy?

One, Durham took a good deal more time to discuss and evaluate the “uses.” We didn’t just go after the tax because others have it. We first became aware of the power of this tax during a failed attempt in Wake County to lure the Durham Bulls to relocate in Raleigh.

Why does the state advocacy group for restaurants and hotels adamantly oppose Durham’s and yet helped facilitate Raleigh and Charlotte’s which are not nearly as well used to the benefit of these businesses? Hard to say but there was a political “sea change” and the group has been stuck in a “no” position across the board for many years.

We kept them apprised as Durham’s hospitality sector actually helped shape support for and the uses for the 1% levy here. I serve on Statewide tourism panels and they were all kept apprised during the evolution of Durham’s proposal. They are probably admiring of how thoughtful it is but political forces there are stuck on “no” and Durham had to move on to a more progressive, win/win approach.

Instead of finding a tax and dreaming up uses, Durham, and particularly DCVB, has been long concerned about Durham’s sense of place. Our cultural landscape is eroding because the donation model no longer works and it isn’t fair to place all of the burden just on property taxpayers. Our community’s curb appeal has eroded as budget cuts found it easy to lop off cleanup efforts.
We have a booming visitor sector, particularly in culinary arts , an award winning Durham Careers In Hospitality program in the public schools and a great full degree program at NCCU. But we need culinary labs at places like NCCU and Durham Tech and a lot of workforce training to remain viable as a visitor destination.

We need a way to fund cultural, recreational and civic facilities and programs that doesn’t rely solely on property taxes. The 1% prepared food levy will be spread over all tax payers who consume prepared food and 40% will be generated by visitors and non-resident commuters. This is much fairer to Durham taxpayers.

And finally, we needed to broaden the burden of self-funding visitor promotion to include day trippers rather than continuing to rely only on a third of the room occupancy tax which places the burden on just 60 businesses and 20% of our visitors to fuel tourism growth for 3,000 businesses and organizations.

Durham has a remarkable story to tell and DCVB needs to have the resources competitors do in order to get the community on a list for consideration and overcome a hurdle most other destinations don’t have, overcoming an underlying current of negativity in nearby communities.

So linked are the uses in a more concise way but I thought it was important for you to get a little bit of the background.

More to come I’m sure.

DÉJÀ VU – WAR OF THE WORLDS

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:28:00 +0000

I just turned 60, but I’m far too young to remember first-hand when Orson Wells broadcast a fictional account of an invasion from outer space, so real that it caused panic in the streets. Unfortunately, the news reports and analysts covering things like the price of oil, the housing crisis, etc., are causing a similar upheaval.

The dramatic radio landing of aliens took place in a New Jersey park. Today there is a very “real’ monument to the invasion in the park noted in the drama. It was all based on an H.G. Wells novel, as was the film version three years ago.

News reporters and editors don’t appear to grasp how much public confidence plays into the financial markets. How careless reporting can stampede people. Or how self-fulfilling news reporting can be when obsessed with what Dr. Barry Glassner documented as the “Culture of Fear.” Market and consumer confidence, like self-confidence can be very fragile.

I’m sure the folks doing the reporting have 401K’s and children to put through school. But I sense, if not outright glee, then a stubborn tête-à-tête each morning as reporters dance with experts in a kind of “yes it is,“ “no it isn’t” dialogue with no big picture perspective, driving apprehension with every new tidbit.

But the risk here isn’t failure to understand or lack of awareness or access to information….the risk to all of us is when the news media doesn’t merely report the news but begins to seem vested in trying to “be right” or “sustain” a story, then our shallowed “freedom of the press” comes with a terrible financial risk to all of us.

So if you’re a reporter or editor pumping the price of gas story…or the mortgage loan crisis…or the health of the financial sector…keep in mind the speculation generated might just be creating the story…so we have stories fueling more stories…far beyond what the facts support. Are we truly benefitting…will we be better off?

The news media is going through some major transformations right now. And one of them is by a growing number of responsible journalists who take responsibility for the sheer weight and intensity created not by “bigger” or more important stories…but by the sheer weight and intensity of so many enterprises covering the news.

URGENT ACTION NEEDED ON PREPARED FOOD TAX

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 12:52:00 +0000

For 17 years, Durham has worked to shape consensus around a proposal for a prepared food tax. Often DCVB did the heavy lifting but now the Mayor and Commissioner Reckhow, along with the City Council and Board of County Commissioners are taking the lead.

Four counties and 1 town have the tax, several with the assent of the NC Restaurant and Lodging Association.

Durham arguably has the most thoughtful proposal…one that benefits residents, visitors and the businesses collecting the tax.

Durham’s is also different because it requires a voter referendum.

It has proceeded half way through the General Assembly. But there is a full court press to get the Senate to block it.

Getting authority to get voter approval to levy this tax will go a long way toward shoring up Durham’s unique sense of place and cultural landscape.

Please email these Senators today, over the weekend or at the very latest Monday, asking them to give Durham this opportunity that has been given to similar communities like Charlotte, Raleigh, Fayetteville and the Outer Banks, even Hillsborough.

Below are the uses for which this tax is targeted:

Beautification, Cleanup and Appearance (5%)
- Create better curb appeal, increase property values
- Way finding signs to make it easier to get around, find dining districts
- Make all of Durham as attractive as the RTP part of Durham
- Litter pick up, especially around quick service clusters

DCVB Community Marketing (10%)
- Draw visitors, promote dining to grow the revenues
- Encourage visitors to circulate more after arrival
- Address Durham image issues
- Promote the Durham brand and identity

Workforce Development (5%)
- Improve Customer Service
- Improve Durham Careers In Hospitality programs in Durham Public Schools
- Encourage training labs at NCCU and Durham Tech
- Promote the culinary arts as a career

Civic, Cultural and Recreational Projects (80%)
- Fund construction and upkeep of museums, theaters, sports facilities, parks, greenways
- Sustain Durham’s cultural landscape
- Protect and foster place based assets, “built,” “natural” and “heritage”

You Can’t Buy This…

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:56:00 +0000

Even though 4 out of 10 residents are new to Durham since 1990, community pride remains as strong as ever. A new, scientific poll in May and June by Catevo reveals that more that 80% of residents are proud or very proud of Durham with fully 1 in 3, very proud, a nearly 9 to 1 ratio over those at the other end of the spectrum.

The community pride is specific to Durham. By nearly 80%, Durham residents prefer to characterize where they live by the city or county with 22% using the general area or region.

It really isn’t possible to buy this allegiance but it also means branding the community can be a little tricky. Fortunately, the overarching brand appears to resonate. In less than two years, 79% of Durham residents have seen or heard, Durham Where Great Things Happen, the signature for the community’s overarching brand. Only 13% have not seen or heard the signature with 3.8% adamant. More than 97% of those aware of the signature believe it makes them feel more positive.

"Virtual Sticky Notes" - Reasons to Believe Durham Brand

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 12:59:00 +0000

Innovation is a value within the overarching Durham brand. Reasons to believe are published several times weekly to Durham Image Watch.

Yesterday, Duke University engineers announced the innovation of virtual, site-specific "sticky notes" or a "mini-blog" to leverage the rapidly converging technologies around social networking, cell phones and global positioning.

The innovation turns the cell phone into a "telescope lens" allowing a user to tap into a virtual network of site-specific information tagged by other cell users whether it be traffic conditions, restaurant reviews, directions or anything else site specific. The Duke research was done in conjunction with the National Science Foundation and Verizon Inc.

Click here to review 300 Great Things About Durham

Culture is a Part of a Community's Infrastructure

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:49:00 +0000

I’ve been asked for some time to post this blog that I originally posted to the Inter-neighborhood Council of Durham listserv.

From: Reyn Bowman
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 4:12 PM
To:; inc-list@rtpnet.org
Subject: RE: INC NEWS -

I only imagine the bind City officials feel but a vibrant and indigenous cultural landscape is just as crucial a part of this community’s infrastructure, as streets, sewer and water, open space, greenways, bike paths and much, much more.

The days when corporate philanthropy filled the funding void for non-profits is vanishing…everywhere. But especially here, where many of our largest corporations now distribute half or more of their philanthropy where commuter employees live rather than the community where they are based.

We can lament it and decry it but it is what it is. We need new paradigms.

Funding for many things including the arts has fallen back on local government. It might be frustrating but we can’t just push them out and expect cake sales and car washes to sustain them at the level of excellence necessary to sustain our quality of life and economic well-being. Just because, like sports, they may evolve from enthusiasts, doesn’t mean they don’t serve a central purpose for the entire community.

The weaning process may have been premature, no matter how well communicated or well intended. We need Durham’s legendary creativity to evolve a coherent system for self-funding the arts, e.g. a dedicated admissions tax which would function as a user fee.

But we also need a coherent way of making decisions about cultural facilities and how to hold arts groups accountable and to determine obsolescence. All easier said than done.

A great deal of our cultural landscape has already eroded. And once gone, it can be very quickly be replaced by McArts or generica and be almost impossible to restore. Places that look like they went shopping for culture one day and brought back one of everything don’t thrive in the long term.

We must solve this problem and I believe together we can.

Top 10 Travel Innovations

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:33:00 +0000

This top 10 list of travel innovations for the past decade by Budget Travel drives home why this is such an exceptionally exciting and equally challenged period to be in the promotion of travel as a tool for economic development.

Each one of these makes travel more enjoyable. But they have even more dramatically challenged destination marketing organizations to stretch limited resources and be relevant in many more ways.

I’ve been at this for well more than 30 years….it has always been exhilarating but at time more than now.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25065524/

Roller Bags	Worldwide ATM Access
Online Travel Booking	GPS Navigation
TripAdvisor	Online Flight Check-in
Global Internet Access	Digital Photography
Cell Phones	Online Maps

Are We “Fantasia” or “Another Reality”?

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:52:00 +0000

Did you see this map in the New York Times with a review of a new book called The Big Sort?

I didn’t but fortunately my friend Bill Giest did and blogged it. The map is hilarious. But as the review notes though, the phenomena isn’t new. I read recently that Mormons were persecuted in Missouri and Illinois before they trekked west to be left alone in what is now Utah. Most people who went West early on were trying to escape the tyranny of a majority way of thought…

And then conformity caught up with the people in Utah and demanded they be a state…but to do so, Utah not only had to ban polygamy to be made a state, they went from household to household and appointed every other family, a Democrat or Republican so they wouldn’t tip the balance of power.

This kind of pressure to conform even happens in small sub-regions like the Triangle. Ever hear someone label someone as not a regional “player.” That means they don’t belong to my “clique.”

And you thought "high school hallway politics” was in the rear view mirror. Maybe the big sort is just about people doing what they did hundreds of years ago…not as much trying to find a place where people think like they do as much as where people are tolerant of people who are different.

Sadly, No Surprise

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:48:00 +0000

A study by Travel Industry of American quantifies now what we’ve all suspected. People are avoiding air travel, more than 41 million trips in just the past few months.

Security hassles, higher fares, chronic schedule and service disruptions are taking a huge toll. The avoided trips cost the US economy $26.5 billion in just the past 12 months in lost sales for airlines and travel related businesses and of course, the destinations and local governments relying on visitors for tax revenue.

It may have begun back when they cut peanuts…and meals….but my guess is it began when instead of using the 80/20 rule with security, we took a 100% lockdown approach after 9/11.

This doesn’t just impact airlines and airports or the cities like Durham that own them. This is a blight on the entire brand of travel, one of the biggest generators of economic activity in the nation.

We must address it together.

“Market Driven” Trumps “Shoulds”

noreply@blogger.com (Reyn) — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 13:31:00 +0000

To me the experience of the past drought points out the practicality of “market incentive/disincentive” vs. preaching “shoulds.”

It isn’t likely that anyone considers themselves a “water glutton” when they hear the term, any more than people who absent-mindedly contribute to road side liter identify themselves as “litterers.” Even when we buy into the “should” as in “you should conserve” it is human nature to assume “we do” and “they don’t.”

And of course there are people who seize issues like this with tenacity, wrap them around another agenda and use words like “coerce.” They are easy to spot because they automatically demean the motives of others, usually to make others look stupid or immoral to make a point. That approach rarely works either.

What does work or market driven incentives like the new tiered system for water rates where the more you use, the more you pay per unit. Government should ratchet that up to just the point where people begin conserving because it makes sense. But this won’t make sense or work as well during times when water is going over the dam and into the ocean. Times like those will require something more than the conservation message and rely more on other logic, like the need to pay for infrastructure.

Another problem with “you should” is that it often leads people to try to tackle 100% of the problem no matter how small or big rather than selectively targeting the 20% of people or businesses who contribute to 80% of the problem. For instance, it doesn’t make sense to obsess with whether water is serviced at a banquet or restaurant vs. mandating hotels and restaurants to install updated low flow devices.

The latter will rapidly address 80% of the problem by focusing on a smaller group (20%) while the 100% solution is very inefficient and costly.

Keep in mind that an upscale restaurant of say 100+ seats will serve about 7 gallons of drinking water a night or about 1/5^th what is used to wash a load of clothes or “half” what it takes to flush only once a toilet that hasn’t been upgraded. They also have high efficiency dishwashers.

A banquet of 300 might use 18 gallons or about the same amount required to run a dishwasher once or to take a shower…even low flow. When one table is preset and no one shows, it might use 1.6 gallons or much less than one person brushing their teeth.

We’ll get to “real” vs. “perceived” conservation more quickly and efficiently by focusing on where we can make the biggest impact first…vs. trying to eat the elephant whole.

Another way to look at it….do we really feel more safe flying because we’re spending billions to require every single commercial airline passenger to forfeit tweezers and bottled water? Or would we feel even more safe if we knew officials were deploying the billions of dollars into systems profiling and targeting the minute number likely to commit a crime?