Guidebook or newspaper?

One of the (many) things I find genuinely useful about Twitter is the ability to get an instant answer or opinion on just about anything. Like this:

Wondering: in the medium term, which is worth more to a tourism business: 1. Nice mention in a guidebook. 2. Nice mention in a paper. Ideas? [@hackneye]

I  didn’t really have a motive for asking this, other than genuine, theoretical curiosity. It strikes me that many PR companies put a lot of effort into courting periodical, weekly and daily media, and a whole lot less time on guidebook writers. Maybe PRs know something that isn’t immediately apparent to me. I write this, partly, as an ill-informed outsider (though both a guidebook writer and journalist). For all kinds of reasons, I don’t take press trips, and only very rarely accept freebies of any kind. I find good PRs vital when I’m researching an article. But, on the whole, I’m more of a ‘pull’ user of PR than a ‘push’, and am certainly less knowledgeable about the PR business than most travel writers… and thus my general impression could be totally incorrect. I asked my question, in part, to alleviate this ignorance.

Alas, one of Twitter’s (also many) weaknesses is the transitory nature of the value it generates. Stuff just gets lost (though I use my tumblr to try and store mine, with mixed success). So, I collated some of the interesting answers I received below (some slightly edited for context). I’d suggest, as an aside, that the kind of people who take the time to answer questions like mine are the kind of people you should follow on Twitter. But that’s just my opinion, again.

Assuming equal reach, seems like the guidebook would have more shelf life, thus would more valuable – even in the medium term. @iKangaroo (also an excellent travel podcaster)

Depends on the quality of the guide or newspaper. Guides bring in more punters for longer. @MichelleChaplow

Depends on book / paper and business – different readerships. I would say, mid-range hotel or hostel = guidebook; 5 star = paper. Would also say resorts reliant on package tourism are better in a paper. Most attractions, tours, restaurants probably better in a guidebook. And another point (the one we don’t like to talk about): If it’s in the book, it’s far more likely to be picked up & used in a paper.  @mrdavidwhitley (also an excellent travel blogger)

This is a guess – guidebook. People keep it and use it again and again. Paper may cause a spike but it’ll pass. @lemondrizzle

Newspaper, assuming it also publishes online. Search engine possibilities plus (with most) higher potential readership. Paper with, say, 100k readers, c.3k likely to read travel review. Most guidebooks don’t sell that, and few are read cover to cover. @Nosemonkey (also an excellent EU politics blogger)

That would depend on the demographic of the paper and the circulation of the guidebook for starters… but the paper possibly attracts a new customer base. @lsdscuba

I would think papers make you more findable (online) during planning – but guidebooks make you more visible once there. @evaapp

I think one interesting aspect about a guidebook is that you probably have it to hand at precisely the moment when you’re booking. Or, better still, at the precise moment you’re hungry. (Eating is more spur-of-the moment than a hotel reservation, usually.) Of course, that doesn’t really work for ‘destination’ hotels and eateries. Luxury probably works better in the colour supplement of your weekend paper. Even if that paper is flying through the ether to your iPad.

If I get any more replies via Twitter, I’ll keep the post updated. Do feel free to add comments below.

Some more that came via Twitter:

Add that many newspaper journos doing round-up pieces source material from the guidebooks, and guides live on in libraries. @melissashales

Depends what type of tourism business you are I’d say: on location attraction = guidebook; flights/hotels = newspaper @keeling