According to new research, when people are choosing a place for a big event, they want to feel unique
2 min
When planning a trip, or seeking a venue for a special celebration, prospective travellers often look at social-media photos of people enjoying possible destinations.
Such selfies can actually make the destinations seem less appealing, according to a recently published study . More specifically, if consumers are considering a place for a self-defining experience such as a wedding, proposal or special vacation, they won’t like it if they see other people pictured there.
The reason, researchers say, is that when a human is featured in a website picture or social-media post of a destination, it can give the viewer a sense that the person pictured has or is signalling ownership of the place.
“We want to stand out by being a little different,” says Zoe Y. Lu , an assistant professor of marketing at Tulane University and the lead author of the paper. “If my cousin saw a picture of my husband proposing to me at a particular national park, for example, my cousin would worry that choosing that same spot to propose to his loved one would be perceived as him being a boring person, lacking a sense of self.”
Across six studies, Lu and two colleagues looked at when and why human presence in online photos lowers viewers’ preference for what she calls “experience venues”—that is, destinations that serve not only as physical spaces but as symbolic arenas that provide a way for people to define themselves.
In one experiment, Lu and her team asked 416 online participants to look at images of two hiking trails, labeled A and B, and to imagine they were picking one for their New Year’s Day hike. Participants liked trail A better than trail B when no person was shown. If there was a hiker present in the photo of trail A but not trail B, viewers preferred trail A significantly less than when no human was shown. “Our theory is that the hiker in the image offers kind of a territorial signal,” says Lu. “It says to our self-identity, ‘Someone else has been here, don’t try their hike, try a hike that seems like nobody has done.’ ”
In another experiment, participants were asked to imagine the photos they were being shown were of two potential wedding locations for themselves. Fifty-three percent of participants chose location A if neither picture included another couple tying the knot. But if another couple was shown in a photo of location A, and not in location B, only 27% of the participants chose location A.
By contrast, in another experiment, participants were told to imagine they were planning a wedding for someone else. As planners, they didn’t mind whether or not a couple was shown in the photo. “Wedding planners aren’t seeking self-identity the way their clients are,” Lu says.
Lu says that her research may have some implications for online marketers. “They might encourage previous customers not to post selfies of special experiences if they want new customers to try those experiences at the same location, which seems counterintuitive, I know,” she says.
Hotels and destinations, too, might reconsider including images of clearly visible guests and visitors in their marketing materials. And social-media influencers might want to skip the selfie in paid posts for destinations, so as not to seem territorial. One exception, Lu notes, is when the person in the photo has an identity that is distinct from that of the viewer, such as the owner of the venue, “but you might want to acknowledge that the person shown is the owner,” she says.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
PSB Academy currently hosts over 20,000 students each year and offers certification, diploma and degree courses.
Rachel Zegler and Gal Gadot star in an awkward live-action attempt to modernize the 1937 animated classic.
Rachel Zegler and Gal Gadot star in an awkward live-action attempt to modernize the 1937 animated classic.
3 minDisney’s first “Snow White” isn’t perfect—the prince is badly underwritten and doesn’t even get a name—but it is, by turns, enchanting, scary and moving. Version 2.0, starring Rachel Zegler in the title role and Gal Gadot as her nefarious stepmother, has been in the works since 2016 and already feels like it’s from a bygone era. After fans seemed grumpy about the rumored storyline and the casting of Ms. Zegler, Disney became bashful about releasing it last March and ordered reshoots to make everyone happy. Unfortunately, the story is so dopey it made me sleepy.
Directed by Marc Webb (“The Amazing Spider-Man” with Andrew Garfield ), the remake is neither a clever reimagining (like “The Jungle Book” and “Pete’s Dragon,” both from 2016) nor a faithful retelling (like 2017’s “Beauty and the Beast”), but rather an ungainly attempt at modernization. The songs “I’m Wishing” and “Someday My Prince Will Come” have been cut; the big what-she-wants number near the outset is called “Waiting on a Wish.” Instead of longing for true love (=fairy tale), Snow White hopes to sharpen her leadership skills (=M.B.A. program). And she keeps talking about a more equitable distribution of wealth in the kingdom she is destined to rule after her mother, the queen, dies and her father, having made a questionable choice for his second spouse, goes missing.
Ms. Gadot, giving it her all, is serviceable as the wicked stepmother. But she doesn’t bring a lot of wit to the role, and the script, by Erin Cressida Wilson , does very little to help. Her hello-I’m-evil number, “All Is Fair,” is meant to be the film’s comic showstopper but it’s barely a showslower, a wan imitation of “Gaston” from “Beauty and the Beast” or “Poor Unfortunate Souls” from “The Little Mermaid.” The original songs, from the songwriting team of Benj Pasek and Justin Paul (“La La Land”), also stack up poorly against the three tunes carried over from the original “Snow White,” each of which has been changed from a sweet bonbon into high-energy, low-impact cruise-ship entertainment. So unimaginative is the staging of the numbers that it suggests such straight-to-Disney+ features as 2019’s “Lady and the Tramp.”
After escaping a plot to kill her, Snow White becomes friends with a digital panoply of woodland animals and with the Seven Dwarfs, who instead of being played by actors are also digital creations. The warmth of the original animation is totally absent here; the tiny miners look like slightly creepy garden gnomes, except for Dopey, who looks like Alfred E. Neuman . As for the prince, there isn’t one; the love interest, Jonathan (a forgettable Andrew Burnap ), is a direct lift of the rogue-thief Flynn Rider , from 2010’s “Tangled,” plus some Robin Hood stylings. His sour, sarcastic tribute to the heroine, “Princess Problems,” is the worst Snow White number since the one with Rob Lowe at the 1989 Oscars.
Ms. Zegler isn’t the chief problem with the movie, but as in her debut role, Maria in Steven Spielberg’s remake of “West Side Story,” she has a tendency to seem bland and blank, leaving the emotional depths of her character unexplored even as she nearly dies twice. Gloss prevails over heart in nearly every scene, and plot beats feel contrived. She and Jonathan seem to have no interest in one another until, suddenly, they do; and when he and his band of thieves escape from a dungeon, they do so simply by yanking their iron chains out of the walls. Everything comes too easily and nothing generates much feeling. When interrogated by the evil queen, who wants to know what happened to her stepdaughter, Jonathan replies, “Snow who?” Which would be an understandable reaction to the movie. “Snow White” is the fairest of them all, in the sense that fair can mean mediocre.
