That was the secondary view I was given. The first was a quote by that (me giggling) astrophysical Neil deGrasse Tyson. No disrespect, he states settings well and with massive clarity. But the one quote he gave us was “knowing enough about a subject to think you’re right, but not enough about the subject to know you’re wrong”. That took me, not by surprise, but it had impact. I reported on America tourism through media clues given. Tourism is something that I know little about (my last vacation was 2002). My main reaction was indolence of Canada, as such as they are shunning America, I stand with them. That will teach most of these 51st State Theologians (they are always praying to god for places they can’t have) a lesson and as a Commonwealthian (aka Australian) I have to stand with my Canadian brethren (sisters too).
So I reported on these fall backs. Then I noticed a few items and my setting slightly changed. There is a rumbling of adjusted data and it doesn’t spell good news. As I see it Google is involved and I for one have massively supported their points of view. As such the quote from that space expressionist (nothing negative) comes to mind. “knowing enough about a subject to think you’re right, but not enough about the subject to know you’re wrong” it is important. Is this me? It could be, I know am not a expert on tourism, I think I still know how to be one and that is it. But data, data is my rap and I have worked with data for decades. So I am spouting here the setting of what I see and perhaps you will also see the issue that arises. Because it is not merely the subject, it is the knowing that the facts do not add up. Even if you accept that the media tends to slice and dice data to give the view they need to have to power the view they want to instill on the readers. Yet, here is the hidden clue. When you look at the slices, the picture feels wrong. The part cannot be seen as the whole. That is the hidden feature of media, that is seemingly their strength. Yet when you have enough slices and partial view, the whole picture tends to make sense. Here it does not, and to illuminate these settings I put several of them here, you can see for yourself what you can make of it. I still think something is off. Lets start off by quoting everyones favourite delusional view (AI) and in this case Googles.
You can see the setting it ‘gives’ us.
The first is given to us (at https://www.ctol.digital/news/us-tourism-slump-retail-impact-july-24/) by ctol digital solutions with ‘Tourism Downturn Threatens $20 Billion US Retail Spending Crisis’ now, we can rant about this but the overall downturn for 2025 is set to $29 billion. And this is now set to a larger premise of $20 billion (retail), there is no reason to fight the numbers, yet as I see it, the ‘gemini’ view is that this merely constitutes $2600 billion, raking in $585 billion in tax dollars. As I see it, this merely constitutes slightly less then 1%, is that a crises, or an overreaction? I could see it as panic writing.
Then we get the New York Post giving us 6 hours ago ‘Foreign tourism to NYC expected to see ‘devastating’ $4B drop this year according to industry experts’ (at https://nypost.com/2025/07/25/us-news/foreign-tourism-to-nyc-expected-to-see-devastating-4b-drop-this-year-according-to-industry-experts/) where we see “The drop — which could be as much as 14% — will have a brutal effect on the New York economy, as foreign tourists usually spend big, according to NYC Tourism + Conventions, which did the study. “Although international visitors make up 20% of total visitation, they account for approximately 50% of all visitor spending, making them essential to New York City’s economy,” group CEO Julie Coker said in a statement.” Really? As I see it $4B is merely 0.25%, but we are looking at the whole picture, for New York 14% and the international visitations being up to 20% is a lot, but when you see it against the ‘Gemini’ (aka Google) numbers, something is starting not to add up.
Then we shift focus to Travel And Tour World (TTW), who gave us a mere 20 hours ago ‘Retailers in Major US Cities Like New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago Face Twenty Billion USD Decline in Sales as International Tourist Spending Slows’ (at https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/retailers-in-major-us-cities-like-new-york-los-angeles-and-chicago-face-twenty-billion-usd-decline-in-sales-as-international-tourist-spending-slows/) where we see “Retailers in major US cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago are feeling the impact of a significant shift in consumer behaviour as foreign tourist spending decline, twenty billion USD. These iconic cities have long depended on the influx of international visitors, who often contribute substantially to retail sales, especially in luxury goods and high-end fashion. However, as travel patterns change and tourists adjust their spending habits, many retailers are seeing fewer footfalls in their stores, directly affecting their bottom lines.” From this we can take two settings. The first is the setting that we are getting closer to the $29 billion and that Los Angeles and Chicago represent 75% of the loss. I have an issue with that. I get that New York is losing money, but to see this as a mere 25% of what Los Angeles and Chicago represent? That doesn’t make sense. I get that Los Angeles is big, as would California as a whole but the percentages are off, especially against the numbers that Google AI gives us. It seems to be a mere storm in a cup of water. And I can recite a whole range of additional articles, but the point should be coming across now. So, is there a bigger picture? Yes, there is and I have stated this again and again. Verification is essential for any data to be set and here I am getting to the stage that Google has altered numbers, or at least limitations of what their (so called) AI is spouting at us. The sources of these data stages are debatable. It is like the old market research settings we can (at times) see that the opposition of any stance might be 69%, but it is the ’N’ that makes the cake and if it is 256 people it is seen as trivial, only if we have 8,263,000 (estimated population of New York) will it become an actual crises issue and these articles give us percentages, but the ’N’ is absent, making the whole setting debatable at best.
To complete the setting I have one additional source. It is the Travel (at https://www.thetravel.com/american-airlines-passengers-concerned-hundreds-of-us-domestic-flights-cancelled-august/) giving us ‘American Airlines Has Passengers Concerned With Hundreds Of U.S. Domestic Flights Cancelled As Of August’ where we see “AA’s domestic U.S. flights. It appears that American Airlines is scaling back significantly, with hundreds of cancellations scheduled to take place as of August. AA has made these changes for several reasons. One of them involves current trends” Now, this might be fine as we are also given “while the other is due to an ongoing dispute with a specific U.S. airport” is that reason to cancel hundreds of flights? It might be, I just don’t know. But the overall news as we saw it in the last few weeks implies that passengers are seemingly absent and that makes the setting of the Google AI debatable at best. The numbers do not add up in several directions and personally I have an issue with that. I am not stating that I am above the quote that Neil deGrasse Tyson gave us all. I am saying that I merely know enough about data that there are issues and most likely in several settings. Personally I am with the setting that Canadian are shunning America (mostly due to the 51st state notion) and we have seen several settings towards view. And even as Canada is merely one nation, the tourism setting seems wrong. Especially as the media is allegedly creating a perfect storm in a teacup, because that is what is implied and the numbers do not bear out that view.
Am I right, am I wrong? I let you consider that for yourself but when you see the ‘AI’ view, it doesn’t add up to the views that the media are giving us. So few free to disagree, feel free to adjust your views too, but something is off. Have a great day today.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 