jazzsax

If travel hasn't been banned - why shouldn't they be allowed to promote their business? If travel was banned - different story. Air Canada can only do one thing to pivot with travel which is focus on Cargo.

Restaurants can do take out, delivery, some have pivoted to make new products, distribution, etc.

Live Nation could make an effort to do streaming concerts but have they? They have the ticketing infrastructure in place, I'm sure they could come up with an idea.

If the government didn't want this behaviour promoted, shut the border, stop your MPs from travelling for vacations, and practice what you preach.

They have zero legal duty to the taxpayer. They have a duty to their shareholders.

Perhaps they should have an ethical duty to not promote behaviour - but the legislation doesn't say they can't do this.

You know full well if the rules will allow, businesses right now will do what they can to survive. The minute fitness places can reopen, they will. Same with dine in, movies, etc. No business in their right mind will generally stay closed and go bankrupt if they can do what they can to stay afloat.

If people don't like it, they can choose to fly another airline. If they can use the influencers to promote travel in a safe manner, go for it.

briantoronto

Of *course* they didn’t. 🙄

YOWgary

When the whole argument boils down to "it's not technically illegal", it's time to re-think. There's a world of difference between "your grandmother's broken her hip? okay, we'll get you there as quick as we can" and "you're gonna love the new swim-up bar at Club Med!"


Air Canada doesn't have to fly people to Mexico, they could make an effort to just sell people tickets to a Zoom call where they watch an actor sit in 22F for a few hours and drink a warm Diet Coke. They have the ticketing infrastructure in place, I'm sure they could come up with an idea.

BTW, streaming concerts started in late March, it hasn't been a terribly successful model. Much like converting widebodies to freighters, it's better than no revenue, but it's not suddenly going to fix your business model.

They've said very clearly, as recently as this week, that that's exactly what they wanted to do, and would have done if it weren't constitutionally forbidden.

My point here isn't that Air Canada should be forced to cease operations - I've flown during COVID myself - but you can't pretend that there's a meaningful difference between Air Canada paying Instagrammers to tell us it's safe to fly to Mexico, and Live Nation saying "yep, we're going to have concerts again starting next week, it'll be totally fine".

After all, if the government really wanted rock concerts to shut down, they should bail out that industry, right?

imverge

I really hope the federal government takes some ownership in exchange for the bailout that AC is so desperate for. That way hopefully the government will have a say if promoting non essential travel is the right thing to do during a pandemic.

hoipolloi

Quote:

CBC: Airline vacation ads face scrutiny as politicians named and shamed for their pandemic trips

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/air...ovid-1.5863387

(I hope this post is not considered off-topic, as it addresses two different subjects, one of them is not the focus of this thread: Air Canada hiring influencers to promote travel, and politicians being caught flouting public health advice by going on vacations over the holidays)

jazzsax

They have... it's called CERB, and in most cases for artists they are making more now with the basic income project than they were before. I can state that - as a musician with a music degree who used to promote concerts ---- basic income experiments are the best thing possible for the arts sector.

So what else do you want to suggest?

Constitutionally the government is already closing the border if if they are requiring airlines to not allow boarding without a PCR test - some areas can't produce these so they've effectively done that.

Next point?

And this is what the government should do.

Take some ownership, take some control, given that we only have TWO airlines ---- bring the fares down, domestic accessibility better, and then deal with the crap like transborder / international traveller with the ability to influence when you actually have an equity stake.

YOWgary

I would be fascinated to discover where you came up with this assertion.

As somebody who's actually been working in the arts sector, I can tell you it's destroying lives and businesses of virtually all of us who actually do this for a living.

CERB was brilliant, but it ran out in October. Those who qualify for CRB know that it'll run out long, long before the performing-arts sector ceases to be effectively illegal.

...but that'll lead us well off-topic for a thread about Air Canada and social-media influencers, as will any discussion of the constitutionality of testing rules.

To bring us back on topic, the fact remains that the government has drawn a clear distinction between travel that is essential and travel that is not. It's a pretty big stretch to launching a social-media campaign specifically designed to promote non-essential, recreational travel without rejecting the existence of that distinction altogether.

24left

AC hired some people who call themselves "social media influencers”. OK, that is AC’s right as a business to do so. To be clear, it was ACV, but moving on...

Some here on AC FT don’t think AC should have done that.

Some here on AC FT don’t think anyone should be flying.

Some don’t think the government should be interfering in the travel plans of the nation

Maybe the Globe & Mail and other media lost some ad revenue because ACV spent it elsewhere.

I don’t have a positive view of these so-called influencers that I can post on a family friendly public forum. I am also not the target group.

Anyone can call themselves an "influencer", even if they've only influenced their mom or their dog. One can set up FB, Twitter and IG pages, throw in a few TikTok videos and off you go.

(The hiring of someone who has a day job as a manager at the Public Health Agency of Canada is worth some criticism.)

As we see from the world around us, “people” can be influenced by many things, and there are many different motivating factors.

As for advertising, a recent example I saw mentioned on a pilot forum was a post with a photo of the entirety that is Dundas Square with mega billboard ads for Transat. The photo wasn't dated but given the emptiness of the square in the middle of the day, I might assume sometime this year. No matter.

Is that a better way for an airline or travel company to spend their money? Who knows.
Would there be a thread on AC FT if AC had bought space on the same billboards? Who knows.
Do we really need to lecture AC etc on their desire to advertise? It's their choice.

*****

I recall many years ago, when we did research on media habits and conducted focus groups, people would complain that they did’t like a show or an article, or an ad on TV or in print.....

I would ask them “Why didn’t you change the channel, or turn the page? You know you can do that, right?”

YOWgary

Can probably just delete half the topics on this board, then...

gcashin

Some of the influencer trips and posts could be viewed as being poorly timed or in bad taste, but for a senior bureaucrat in a Public Health agency ("manager of the office of border and travel health") to take a free trip from ACV as a side gig as an influencer is shocking. She's in charge of border and travel health as her day job, a role which presumably has interface with the travel industry, and is accepting free trips in exchange for Instagram posts promoting how safe it is to travel? Wow, just wow.

I can't see how this would be got past any ethics reviews even outside of a pandemic. Also a bit surprised that ACV wouldn't have done some due diligence to identify potential red flags like obvious conflicts of interest before signing up someone to be a public promoter on their behalf (I'd expect a 30 second web search would be identified a potential red flag).

Crampedin13A

You have senior bureaucrats getting free Air Canada Vacations international trips as travel bloggers while we are told to stay in place. Guaranteed there will be no repercussions for this woman either despite the conflict of interest

https://nationalpost.com/news/public...s-unacceptable

Transpacificflyer

This data must be taken in the context that these are actual diagnosed cases and do not reflect actual total infections. The vast majority of infected people are unidentified because they are either not diagnosed as infected (not tested and/or not presenting for medical care). Today the JAMA released an analytical model study that holds that 59% of all transmission came from asymptomatic transmission, SARS COV-2 Transmission From people Without Covid19 Symptoms: (JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(1):e2035057. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.35057). In plain language, a larger number of infected people were arriving in Canada who were infected.

Air travel was not banned because the federal government was constrained by the legal right of mobility in Canada. Also, there were legitimate reasons for air travel to continue. The government was trying to avoid an all or none outcome. Your argument is one of exploiting the government's good faith undertaking to help people with a need for travel. Air Canada's promotion of international leisure travel that includes infection hotzones has unleashed a groundswell of anger and pent up rage. I suggest you tune in to some of the talk radio stations and commentary shows and you will have an indication of the anger. Air Canada is basically voiding its bladder on the leg of Canadians.

In respect to your comment that Air Canada is responsible only to its shareholders, you are mistaken. The taxpayers you dismiss are helping pay the wage subsidies Air Canada accepted. The Board of Directors has a duty to behave in an ethical manner. Promotion of activity that is contrary to the public good is an invitation to litigation.

And then we have this idiotic concept of "influencers". The role of influencers is an invention. Youtube & Instagram influencers are specific to trends for fashion and music. There is no evidence that influencers will drive consumer traffic on adult travel. However, the great minds who describe their onboard menus as gourmet cuisine have decided that bimbos and bubbleheads will drive business. If Air Canada has any common sense it will suspend this promotion campaign.

painintheuk

This is the bit that I never understood...

expert7700

Perhaps AC should run new commercials, with all the influencers AND politicians traveling to Sun destinations together on the same flight.

Show how easy they get paid PCR tests in Cuba or Bermuda, then enjoying 14 days of quarantine back in Canada.

The Jetz planes are already committed, so do the next best thing and fly them on the newly ungrounded (but even more safe*) 737 MAX. ​​​​​​Influencer feeds can show comfy MAX upright seating, the spacious spa style lav, etc. *The naysayers may point out that the post-fix MAX plane most recently flew with one bad engine, a bad hydraulic system, and unbalanced fuel.

Having influencers and government officials would certainly help reassure us that there is nothing to worry about!

Jagboi

I'm sure the thought process AC hopes to stimulate is that if (influencer person well regarded by a consumer) is seen to be travelling for leisure, then why shouldn't I do that too? Sort of like politicians taking vacations in warm places - if then can, why can't I?