Most travel writing is bad. Not because the writers are bad. Because the structures travel writing operates within produce specific failure modes that affect quality across the genre.
The dominant patterns of travel writing in 2026 — listicles, "ultimate guides," social-media-optimized destination shots, sponsored content, AI-generated SEO-targeted articles — all systematically push writing away from what makes travel writing valuable.
Here's what I think is wrong with most travel writing, and what I try to do differently in this site.
The basic problem
Travel writing is structurally captured by commercial pressures that are misaligned with the reader's actual interest.
The reader typically wants:
To understand what places are actually like.
To make better decisions about where to go and what to do.
To experience a kind of vicarious depth that good writing about places can produce.
To be informed honestly about tradeoffs and limitations.
The commercial pressures push toward:
Generating clicks, which favors listicle formats and sensational claims.
Generating affiliate revenue, which favors recommendations of bookable products.
Generating SEO traffic, which favors keyword-targeted articles regardless of underlying expertise.
Generating sponsored content, which produces favorable coverage of paying partners.
Generating shareable social content, which favors photographable surface beauty over substantive depth.
The misalignment systematically corrupts the writing.
The listicle problem
"10 Best Beaches in [Country]" is a structurally limited form.
What listicles do well:
Provide quick reference information.
Generate clicks and shares.
Establish surface-level coverage of destinations.
What listicles do poorly:
Communicate texture or feel of places.
Acknowledge that most "best" rankings are arbitrary or marketing-driven.
Account for taste and individual preference.
Provide context that would help readers actually decide.
Convey real expertise or sustained engagement with places.
The listicle format dominates partly because it's easy to produce and easy to consume. The cost is that listicles displace deeper writing that would actually serve readers better.
The "ultimate guide" problem
The "ultimate guide to [city]" pretends to be comprehensive when it's structurally not.
What ultimate guides typically include:
Surface-level coverage of major attractions.
Basic logistical information available from any source.
Recommendations driven by SEO requirements rather than expertise.
Generic safety and etiquette tips applicable to any destination.
What they typically don't include:
Specific writer expertise demonstrated through detail.
Honest acknowledgment of what the destination doesn't do well.
Context about how the destination has changed over time.
The kind of specific quirky knowledge that comes from sustained engagement.
The result is content that's technically comprehensive while being substantively shallow.
The affiliate problem
Affiliate revenue distorts coverage in subtle ways.
What affiliate-driven writing privileges:
Bookable hotels, tours, activities.
Companies with affiliate programs.
Specific destinations where affiliate revenue concentrates.
What affiliate-driven writing under-covers:
Destinations without strong affiliate ecosystems.
Specific local businesses too small to affiliate.
Aspects of destinations that don't generate booking commissions.
Critical assessment of recommended businesses.
Affiliate revenue isn't inherently corrupt, but the structural effects shape coverage in specific predictable ways.
The sponsored content problem
Sponsored content is the most direct corruption of travel writing.
What sponsored content typically does:
Presents commercial relationships as editorial coverage.
Inflates quality assessments of paying partners.
Excludes critical assessment.
Hides the commercial relationship behind editorial framing.
Some publications disclose sponsorships clearly. Many don't. The reader often can't distinguish between editorial and sponsored content.
The result is a corrupted information environment where readers can't trust the writing they're reading.
The SEO problem
Search engine optimization shapes what gets written.
What SEO typically rewards:
Specific keyword targets ("things to do in [city]").
Comprehensive coverage of specific topic areas.
Long-form content optimized for search rather than reader engagement.
Specific structural patterns (H2 headers in specific positions, FAQ sections, etc.).
What SEO doesn't reward:
Writing distinguished by voice, perspective, or expertise.
Personal essays that don't target specific keywords.
Critical or contrarian assessments.
Writing for readers who don't arrive via search.
SEO has produced an entire category of travel writing optimized for search algorithms rather than for readers.
The AI content problem
AI-generated travel content has accelerated the systemic problems.
What AI generates well:
Structurally correct articles meeting basic information requirements.
Listicles with reasonable surface coverage.
Generic content optimized for SEO patterns.
What AI doesn't generate well:
Specific personal expertise from sustained engagement.
Quirky knowledge from particular places.
Honest critical assessment.
Voice and perspective.
The flood of AI-generated travel content has made the structural problems worse. Generic, surface-level, SEO-optimized content is now produced at industrial scale.
What I try to do instead
Given these problems, what does this site try to do?
Write from substantial direct engagement. I write about places I've lived in for weeks or months, not about places I've visited briefly.
Acknowledge limitations. I don't pretend to be comprehensive. I don't pretend to have expertise I don't have.
Include specific details. The texture of places comes from specific details, not from general descriptions.
Acknowledge tradeoffs. Most destinations have things they do well and things they don't. Honest writing covers both.
Include personal perspective. I have a specific point of view; I name it rather than pretending to neutral expertise.
Avoid affiliate relationships. The site doesn't take affiliate revenue. I name things I like; the naming isn't commercially motivated.
Resist listicle structure. Most posts here are essays rather than lists.
Write for readers, not algorithms. Structure follows what serves communication rather than what scores SEO points.
The result is fewer posts at slower pace than commercial sites. The intent is that what's here is worth reading.
What good travel writing looks like
Travel writing I read and value:
Books rather than blogs typically. The book form supports the kind of sustained development that captures place complexity.
Specific writer voices rather than generic SEO content. Writers with point of view and expertise produce different writing than content factories.
Older travel writing. Pre-internet travel writing was structurally different and often better than contemporary commercial writing.
Writers with substantial place engagement. Writers who lived in places for years produce different work than writers who visited briefly.
Writers willing to be critical. Honest assessment of destinations' limitations is part of good writing about them.
Writers who acknowledge subjectivity. Travel experience is unavoidably subjective; writing that pretends otherwise is structurally dishonest.
Specific writers I read
To name some:
Bruce Chatwin — sustained engagement with specific places, distinctive voice.
Pico Iyer — careful long-form essays with substantial place expertise.
Robert Macfarlane — landscape writing that treats places with serious attention.
Olivia Laing — places treated as occasions for thinking rather than as items to consume.
Patrick Leigh Fermor — old-style travel writing with substantial expertise and voice.
The list is incomplete and idiosyncratic. The pattern across them is treating places seriously rather than as content material.
What this means for travel writing's future
I'm not optimistic about commercial travel writing.
The structural pressures produce systematic problems that aren't going away.
AI is making the situation worse rather than better at the commercial scale.
The advertising-driven economic model that funds most travel content is corrupted in ways that won't self-correct.
What I am optimistic about:
Independent travel writing supported by readers directly. Newsletters, books, small sites that don't depend on advertising can produce better work.
Travel writing as personal essay or literary form. The writing-as-art tradition continues outside commercial pressures.
Travel writing tied to specific expertise. Writers with deep knowledge of specific places can produce work that AI and SEO content factories cannot.
Slow-built writing audiences. Writers who build audiences through substantive work over time produce sustainable independent operations.
This site is in that tradition rather than the commercial one.
What I'd tell readers
If you read travel writing:
Read travel books, not just blog posts. The form supports substantively better work.
Find specific writers whose voice you trust. Build relationships with writers rather than relying on aggregator sites.
Be skeptical of "best of" listicles. The category is structurally limited.
Be skeptical of comprehensive guides. They're often shallow under the comprehensive surface.
Notice when content is sponsored, affiliate-driven, or AI-generated. Adjust trust accordingly.
Pay for travel writing you value. The advertising-driven model has corrupted the genre. Direct reader support can sustain better work.
What I'd tell prospective writers
If you're considering writing about travel:
Don't optimize for the structures that have corrupted the genre.
Build expertise through sustained engagement with specific places.
Develop a voice and perspective rather than generic informativeness.
Be willing to be honest about destinations' limitations.
Find sustainable economics that don't depend on the corrupted advertising model.
Write for readers, not algorithms.
The competitive landscape is brutal but the niche for substantively good writing exists. AI commodity content makes the human work that's actually distinguished more valuable, not less.
What I'll keep doing
This site will continue:
Slow pace of new content. New posts when I have something specific to say.
Long-form essays rather than listicles.
Writing about places I've actually engaged with rather than places I've visited briefly.
Honest assessment including limitations and complexities.
Avoiding affiliate relationships, sponsorships, and SEO-optimization patterns that distort writing.
Writing in a specific voice rather than imitating generic travel-content patterns.
The audience for this kind of work is smaller than the audience for commercial travel content. The audience that exists has demonstrated patience and engagement.
That's the deal I'm running. Most travel writing is bad. This is what I try to do instead.
You decide whether it's working.
