Latest news with #RickSteves
BBC News
12 hours ago
- BBC News
Why Rick Steves wants Americans to travel more
Ironically, I've often found that it's in the moments when I need a vacation the most that it feels the least appropriate to pack a bag and take one. Being a journalist, I've covered everything from political crises to economic turmoil – and that's just in the last few months, let alone the last few years. As I read through the panoply of headlines showing how tense the world is at this moment, I often find myself asking, "Is taking my family on a trip really the best thing to do right now?" Somehow, a holiday seems wrong, even frivolous. But maybe that's the wrong attitude. I recently spoke with travel writer Rick Steves, who told me that travel is actually more important than ever during moments of global tension. He sees travel as a way for people – Americans, especially – to bolster their sense of understanding of the people and the world around them. It's a provocative thesis – and one that has already changed my outlook on what it means to be a traveller in 2025. You can watch – or read – more of our conversation below. Below is an excerpt from our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity. Katty Kay: We're living in a moment that seems particularly stressful and difficult. I imagine some people might think travel is the last thing they want to add to their plate and that it's a bit indulgent, maybe even frivolous. Why would you still encourage Americans to travel, even today? Rick Steves: It's more important for Americans to travel right now than it ever has been. We're a frightened society and the most frightened people are the people with no passports, whose worldview is shaped by fear-mongering commercial TV news. As a traveller, I have spent 100 days a year ever since I was a kid overseas and working on my travel writing. I know that the flip side of fear is understanding. We gain understanding when we travel. If everybody travelled before they voted, the United States would be in a much different situation right now. KK: A lot of people are anxious about the world at the moment, whether it's about things like climate change or wars around the world. What is it specifically about travel that is so important in these moments? RS: When we travel, we get to know the enemy. The most interesting book I ever wrote was called Travel as a Political Act. Half of that book is taken from experiences I had travelling in places my government doesn't want me to go: Palestine, Cuba, Iran. Americans don't realize that the number-one destination in the Caribbean for German and Canadian vacationers is Cuba. Americans can't believe that the Lonely Planet guidebook to Cuba is a very good-selling book for that publisher, because we didn't think anybody goes to Cuba. If more people travelled, we'd understand that everybody's had their challenges and we can just realise the world's filled with good people. It's filled with joy and love. There's a few bad apples and a few complicated things and there's some serious problems, but we can aspire to get to know people instead of building a wall and hiding behind it. People are what carbonate the travel experience. My takeaways from countries like Iran, Palestine and Cuba are endearing moments with beautiful people. People are living in very difficult situations when they live without democracy and freedom. We're seeing right now in the news in all these countries that there are real people that want real freedoms and real civil liberties. They have real economic challenges that if you didn't travel, you'd hardly be able to empathise with. Do you really want to learn about the realities of this planet? Or would you rather just stay home and go to a barbecue with your privileged friends? It's a choice you have in your life. KK: Has travel ever made you less happy? RS: It's burdened me with realities that maybe it would be easier not to know, as a caring citizen of this planet as well as an American. And I'm thankful for that, because I don't want to go to my grave just with a bunch of beer-commercial kind of experiences. I want to have made a difference and do the best I can to help this world live together as it should and can: peacefully. KK: It sometimes seems to me that just as important as travelling itself is what you can bring back to your country. Is that that Pollyanna-ish of me or does that resonate? RS: Not at all. The best souvenir you can take home is a broader perspective. A good traveller won't see culture shock as something to avoid. That's sort of the default: help me escape culture shock. Culture shock is a constructive thing. It's the growing pains of a broadening perspective and it needs to be curated. That's what I do as a tour guide and a travel writer. I curate culture shock. I just love the thought that when we get out of our comfort zones and travel, we have a broadening perspective. That's the beautiful thing about travel – and a lot of people miss it entirely. They're just on the beach. They've changed the weather, but they haven't changed the culture. That's a vacation. There's three kinds of travellers: tourists, travellers and pilgrims. The default is just to be a tourist and focus on little fun stuff. That's seeing the road as a playground, and that's okay. But I like to also see the road as a school – that would be the traveller. And I like to see the road as a church or a mosque or a synagogue. That would be the pilgrim. I like to mix those three things together, and not just to be a hedonist and not just to be a monk, but to be thoughtful, to be spiritual, to be poetic, to be having fun with nature and meeting new people and drinking new drinks. That's just what really carbonates the whole experience. KK: You mentioned fear earlier. Has there been any time that fear has stopped you from travelling somewhere? RS: Sure! I'm afraid to go to North Korea. I'd never go there. There's smart fear: I don't want to get sick. I don't want to get mugged. I don't want to be caught in a war. I don't want to be cowering in a little corner with a bunch of people trapped in a nightmarish travel experience. I'm not that bold. I'm not a thrill-seeker in my travels. I just want to get out of my comfort zone. A lot of people ask me what my favourite country is. And I always write about Europe, since Europe is my beat. But I surprise them when I say India. I just find India really rearranges my cultural furniture. It wallops my ethnocentricity, and it reminds me that we Westerners are not the norm. That's a very cool part of travel. The world's not a pyramid with the United States on top and everybody else trying to figure it out. KK: What has travel taught you about America that you might not have known if you hadn't travelled as much as you have? RS: There's lots of things. My parents taught me the work ethic. It was presented to me as "the" work ethic. You work hard. And I've travelled around the world and I realised there are different work ethics – and that's okay. Some people have a better balance in their life. Some people take a break when they want to take a break. Some people don't work when the sun's out, even though that would be better from a productivity point of view. It's a choice you make. Those kinds of things are exciting. KK: Rick, a conversation that wasn't around when you or I were teenagers is obviously climate change. I'm wondering whether the whole concept of climate and travelling at a time of climate change has changed at all the way you think about your own travel. RS: Well, I'm not going to be flight shamed out of my travels, but I am going to ethically mitigate the carbon I create when I fly. I'm going to travel in a way that minimises my carbon footprint. I'm going to travel in a way, hopefully, that maximises the positive results of my travel, which is becoming a citizen of the planet. I take 30,000 people to Europe on our tours every year and our government's never going to be this ethical, but as an ethical businessman, I need to pay for my cost of goods sold. 30,000 people contribute $30 each. That's $900,000. Round up to one million dollars. I have a self-imposed carbon tax of a million dollars a year that I invest in a portfolio of 10 non-profit organisations that help farmers in the global south do their work while contributing less to climate change. But then the flip side of that coin is also to travel in a way that gets you out of your comfort zone so you will come home with a broader perspective. That's the beautiful souvenir that we need more than ever right now. If our travels can save us from one needless war, that's going to do a lot to cut back on heartache and the pollution of this planet. And that's a good thing. --
Yahoo
28-06-2025
- Yahoo
7 Things You Should Do in Florence at Least Once, According to Celeb Travel Experts
7 Things You Should Do in Florence at Least Once, According to Celeb Travel Experts originally appeared on Parade. With its Renaissance masterpieces, swoon-worthy architecture and life-changing gelato, Florence is a city that stirs the soul. But with so much to see (and eat), it can be overwhelming to know where to start. That's why we turned to the pros—celebrity travel experts like Samantha Brown, Rick Steves, Mark Ellwood and Matt Kepnes (aka Nomadic Matt) for their favorite spots in the Tuscan capital. From iconic landmarks and hidden gardens to locals-only gelato joints and a museum filled with medieval armor, these seven picks offer a curated mix of Florence's greatest hits and under-the-radar gems. Ready to fall in love with the Italian city? Here's where to begin. Related: Whether you're climbing the Duomo's dome at dawn or sipping espresso in a quiet courtyard, these are the places travel pros return to again and again. No trip to Florence is complete without a stop at the Duomo, so make it your first destination. Between the breathtaking architecture and magnificent frescoes, it's nearly impossible not to feel something profound—even Martha Stewart got emotional during her visit, recounting a stolen kiss at the cathedral in her documentary Martha. As Samantha Brown puts it, 'The main draw, of course, is Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore. Construction began in 1296, but wasn't finished for over 170 years.' This awe-inspiring landmark crowns Florence's skyline with Brunelleschi's iconic red-tiled dome. Don't just admire it from the piazza—climb the dome or Giotto's Bell Tower for a bucket-list view of terracotta rooftops and the Tuscan hills beyond. It's 463 steps to the top, but the panorama is more than worth the effort. After the Duomo, travel expert Rick Steves recommends keeping the cultural momentum going at the Uffizi Gallery, where you can witness The Birth of Venus and La Primavera by Botticelli, Bacchus by Caravaggio and Doni Tondo by Michelangelo up close. "Reserve timed tickets as soon as you know when you'll be in town to avoid wasting hours in long lines, especially during peak season," he suggests. Then follow his self-guided Renaissance Walk (also available as a free audio tour) to connect the city's top sights. He also advises travelers to 'set up a good itinerary in advance, grouping your sightseeing by neighborhood' for a smoother day. Avoid Sundays and Mondays, when many attractions close early, and steer clear of the first Sunday of the month—'free days are actually bad news,' he warns, due to crowds and the lack of reservation options. For a foodies in search of a more local experience, Brown recommends skipping the tourist-filled Mercato Centrale and heading east to . 'It's where actual Florentines shop,' she says—and apparently Stanley Tucci agrees, as seen in his new series Tucci in Italy. The market is packed with stalls offering fresh vegetables, meats, cheeses and irresistible street food, all humming with nonnas doing their daily shopping. Grab a warm porchetta sandwich, find a sunny spot nearby and savor a slice of authentic Florence. Related: Florence may be packed with centuries of art and architecture, but Brown reminds us that it's also about slowing down. 'You don't need to do it all,' she says. 'Find a few places that speak to you, enjoy an espresso or a glass of Chianti and just be present. That's the real beauty of Florence.' For a peaceful pause, head to Boboli Gardens behind the Pitti Palace, where you can sip wine on a shaded bench surrounded by Renaissance statues and sweeping views. Or visit Bardini Gardens for a quieter, less-touristed escape with blooming wisteria in spring and panoramic city vistas. For something more local, Piazzale Michelangelo offers not only that iconic Florence skyline, but also grassy slopes perfect for a picnic or a reflective moment. Travel writer Mark Ellwood has his priorities in order when in Florence—and the first stop is gelato. For the real deal, he shared his favorite spot with the New York Post: , a hole-in-the-wall gem near Palazzo Vecchio, 'all exposed wood beams and Italian-spouting staff.' This is where the original gelato master's legacy lives on. Expect 'gooey faves like rice pudding, tangy fruit sorbets (try the mandarin) and even offbeat combos like pistachio-chili-chocolate," he says. At just €1.80 a cone, it's a deliciously affordable indulgence well worth seeking out. For an off-the-radar escape, travel blogger Nomadic Matt recommends the , a public library tucked inside a former convent just a short walk from the Duomo. Popular with local students, it's also "an important cultural center," complete with a dedicated section on Florentine history, he says. The shaded courtyard, framed by leafy shrubs and a towering tree, offers a calm spot to sit and recharge. But the real hidden gem? The Caffetteria delle Oblate, a rooftop café upstairs with a quiet terrace and one of the best unobstructed views of the Duomo—without the tourist crowds. Related: Kepnes calls the 'one of Florence's most interesting and unique museums,' even though it doesn't get nearly the attention it deserves. Tucked away on the outskirts of town, this lesser-known gem houses the private collection of Frederick Stibbert, who also donated his villa and gardens to the city. Inside, he says you'll find over 36,000 artifacts, including ornate historic armor from the Middle East and a fully reconstructed army of medieval knights on horseback in the grand hall. The showstopper? "Napoleon Bonaparte's cloak from when he was crowned," he shares. At just €10 admission, it's a budget-friendly and crowd-free way to explore a completely different side of Florentine history. Next: 7 Things You Should Do in Florence at Least Once, According to Celeb Travel Experts first appeared on Parade on Jun 20, 2025 This story was originally reported by Parade on Jun 20, 2025, where it first appeared.
Telegraph
22-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
The age of the distinguished, insightful travelogue is over – now it's all idiots abroad
Whether it's Joe Lycett knocking back Swedish firewater made of beaver glands in Channel 4's Travel Man: 48 Hours in...; Gino D'Acampo setting fire to his deodorant spray and skinny dipping ('look: free willy!') his way through Italy in ITV's Gordon, Gino and Fred: Road Trip; or Sue Perkins smirking while snacking on giant croissants and pan-fried crickets in Sue Perkins' Big Adventure: Paris to Istanbul (also Channel 4), you might have been struck by something about recent TV travel documentaries: namely, their lack of the je ne sais quoi that marked the heyday of travel-documentary oeuvre. The Seventies saw Alan Whicker hanging out with the Sultan of Brunei and the super-rich recluses of the South Pacific islands, all sardonic wit and (whatever the climate) his signature tailored suit. The Eighties and Nineties, of course, gave us the affable Michael Palin, bringing to life the architectural wonders of Timbuktu and the Tuareg caravan travellers of the Sahara Desert. In the 2010s we moseyed along the River Nile and the Trans-Siberian Railway from Russia to Mongolia and China with plummy national treasure Dame Joanna Lumley. Not a shot of snake's blood or gratuitous nude between them. Veteran American travel writer Rick Steves, 70, recently weighed in on the debate around the current crop of dumbed-down travel programming, noting that TV travel shows and YouTubers baiting clicks with 'grossout' foreign food and whizzing through world bucket lists are problematic for the destinations that are featured. Such programming, Steves argues, peddles the 'superficial aspects of travel and tourist traps' as it 'exaggerates a destination's potential dangers for comedic effect' ('don't drink the toilet water, guys – phnarr, phnarr!'). Seasoned travel head Noel Josephides, aged 77, chairman of tour operator Sunvil, also laments the loss of the golden days of linear television from the Seventies to Nineties, when travel shows were 'serious and their presenters were respected' by both the public and travel industry. 'I used to watch Michael Palin, Wish You Were Here…? on ITV, and the Holiday programme on BBC religiously, and if a destination was mentioned [Sunvil] could fill a whole season with bookings,' he recalls. These days, he notes, none of these things are true. 'Everything has been dumbed down and it's more about the presenter than the destination,' he complains. Former TV commissioner Gillian Crawley tells me that she believes 'celebs with no insight' should be removed from TV travel scheduling altogether, including actors such as Palin and Lumley and today's C-list crop. 'I used to wonder why I was sending someone from Corrie to Borneo to look at the orangutans because [the actor] was pretending to be an eco-warrior at the time,' she recalls. Instead, Crawley rates presenters with a depth of knowledge and a 'critical eye', such as Sir David Attenborough and Dame Mary Beard. 'Even Michael Portillo is better than some of the current crop,' she says of the politician turned rail presenter, 'as he at least does like trains.' She concludes: 'It doesn't matter whether someone is posh or not posh – they're just slebs with no special insight and they can pay for their own holidays.' However, Kylie Bawden, who has worked as a location arranger on shows including Ainsley's Caribbean Kitchen and Joe Lycett's Travel Man: 48hrs in Washington, DC disagrees with the idea that travel TV has been dumbed down. The more intimate onus of today's travel TV, she says, is as much down to social media and consumer demand as it is an erosion of standards. 'Viewers have access to celebrities via social media that was never possible in the Palin days,' she tells me. 'Today's audiences want something more light-hearted than before, but they also want to feel like there's a real possibility that they could replicate the experiences they are watching on TV. So, less crossing the Sahara desert in a camel caravan and more the best speakeasies in Washington or where to go to experience trad pub music in Ireland.' 'Parasociality', or the trend of viewers and listeners wanting to feel as if they are personal friends of the celebrities they follow, is – it seems – partly to blame. Bawden adds that destinations are often more than happy to roll the red carpet out for Lycett, Perkins et al with a view to the audience booking a holiday inspired by TV. 'Set-jetting [viewers travelling to destinations they have seen on TV] really drives bookings in the 2020s,' Bawden argues. Gavin Bate, director and mountain leader at tour company Adventure Alternative, corroborates this link between TV appearances and booking spikes: 'When the Comic Relief celebrity team climbed Kilimanjaro and the BBC aired the programme on a Sunday night, we got loads of Kilimanjaro bookings the following morning,' he explains. 'And any kind of wildlife programme, especially the Attenborough ones, will result in people booking more wildlife holidays – especially to see endangered species like the clouded leopard in Borneo.' James Willcox, founder of Untamed Borders, takes it a step further, believing that 'we are more likely these days to see bookings driven by the antics of travel YouTubers and Instagrammers than traditional travel documentaries'. One thing's for certain: the era of the patrician broadcaster showing viewers destinations they can never hope to reach has lost favour, and in its place we have the pally 'everyman' and 'everywoman' travelogue, with their smorgasbord of tick-list travel experiences. And yet, there are some antidotes to this phenomenon – in the gritty Channel 4 shows of ex-Army officer Levison Wood, for example, who slogs through inhospitable terrains from Siberia to the elephant migration routes of Burundi, and in Simon Reeve's various odysseys, in which he combines a diffident everyman approach (that appeals to the 2020s viewer) with thoughtful explorations of remote locations and communities. Wood is back with a show later in 2025 and Reeve is currently on BBC 2, exploring 'Arctic tundra, vast forests and stunning fjords in Scandinavia with Simon Reeve. 'I am very relieved Simon Reeves is back on with his Scandinavia series,' vlogger Emma Reed, who is based in Hampshire, tells me. 'Comedians on tour or hapless celeb father/son jaunts are becoming sooo tedious.' I'll raise a shot of snake's blood to that.
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Editorial: Leave Airbnbs and short-term rentals alone, aldermen. There's no crisis here.
Nobody loves killing Airbnbs more than hoteliers. After New York City moved in 2022 to sharply restrict short-term rentals by enacting something called Local Law 18, hotel rates went through the roof. Last September, it cost an average of $417 to spend the night in Manhattan. And, typically, that's for one small room; however many kids you might have along with you. Although it was passed on the grounds of promoting safety and equity, Local Law 18 ended up making it nearly impossible for a regular person to rent out their Manhattan place on a short-term basis unless they were themselves present in their apartment with the guests. The vast majority of short-term listings quickly vanished, much to chagrin of ordinary working people who had used Airbnb to rent out their homes when they were out of town for work or to help offset their massive residential rent during times of increased demand such as major conventions or sporting events. It also explains why, if you try and get an Airbnb in New York, the host will probably say that they will be at least kinda present, so as to conform with the law. Not that anyone wants that. Airbnbs can indeed be a problem in certain hugely popular destinations. Travel writer Rick Steves has described the situation in some European tourist hubs where local people get priced out of a central city and landlords rent only to tourists. Thus, instead of visiting a vibrant community with local shops and bakeries, tourists are met instead with other tourists and tchotchke stores. And an argument can be made that short-term rentals add to the pressure on longer-term rents by reducing supply, although that is a contested argument in most cities because such rentals also encourage new construction. Short-term rentals also allow visitors to avoid costly hotel rates and have room to spread out. They are rented by people who then walk into local restaurants and businesses and buy stuff or attend live entertainment offerings. Airbnbs tend to draw visitors out of the downtown core and into less affluent neighborhoods, spreading the economic pie beyond the central business district and letting families, especially, save some money and get to know the real heart of a city. In Chicago, for example, there are relatively few hotels outside the center of the city; if you are a jazz fan and want to stay close to the Green Mill, for example, an Airbnb in Uptown would offer you real benefits and you might end up staying longer, or even moving here altogether. We don't see any evidence of Chicago having some massive Airbnb problem; this is a city that needs to expand its tourist base, not suppress it by killing Airbnbs. We know of few buildings that have been taken over by short-term rentals and we note that large buildings can already restrict such rentals on their own, using existing condo regulations, if they so choose. For sure, there's a danger of people holding parties in these places or using them to drink underage. But some people also behave badly in hotel rooms and private residences. Laws are on the books that can be enforced without preventing the rentals in the first place, and we have no problem with a registration procedure that can help police see if a rental is proving to be a repeat problem. Chicago has many protections in place. If 25% of a precinct's registered voters want to ban short-term rentals and sign a petition, they can do so now. So we see no need whatsoever for the over-reaching ordinance championed by Ald. Anthony Napolitano, 41st, and approved by the Committee on License and Consumer Protection that would give aldermen the power to outright ban Airbnbs by aldermanic fiat and then force Airbnb and its competitors to collect signatures to overturn the ban and stay in business. Imagine if that was proposed for restaurants or hotels! In practice, this would be a field day for NIMBY types (or sly hotel owners) who have an alderman's ear (or the means to boost an aldermanic bank account). In practice, it would mean that short-term rentals would likely disappear all over the city, reducing the side hustles of lots of cash-strapped folks, hurting local businesses, reducing city and state tax revenues and meaning that visitors would have no choice but to stuff themselves and their kids into costly hotel rooms instead of being able to stay where most Chicagoans live. City Council should leave this well alone. If and when the city is overwhelmed with tourists, we're happy to revisit our view. But at this cash-strapped juncture for the city of Chicago, Napolitano's power move should be voted down. Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@
Chicago Tribune
13-06-2025
- Business
- Chicago Tribune
Editorial: Leave Airbnbs and short-term rentals alone, aldermen. There's no crisis here.
Nobody loves killing Airbnbs more than hoteliers. After New York City moved in 2022 to sharply restrict short-term rentals by enacting something called Local Law 18, hotel rates went through the roof. Last September, it cost an average of $417 to spend the night in Manhattan. And, typically, that's for one small room; however many kids you might have along with you. Although it was passed on the grounds of promoting safety and equity, Local Law 18 ended up making it nearly impossible for a regular person to rent out their Manhattan place on a short-term basis unless they were themselves present in their apartment with the guests. The vast majority of short-term listings quickly vanished, much to chagrin of ordinary working people who had used Airbnb to rent out their homes when they were out of town for work or to help offset their massive residential rent during times of increased demand such as major conventions or sporting events. It also explains why, if you try and get an Airbnb in New York, the host will probably say that they will be at least present, so as to conform with the law. Not that anyone wants that. Airbnbs can indeed be a problem in certain hugely popular destinations. Travel writer Rick Steves has described the situation in some European tourist hubs where local people get priced out of a central city and landlords rent only to tourists. Thus, instead of visiting a vibrant community with local shops and bakeries, tourists are met instead with other tourists and tchotchke stores. And an argument can be made that short-term rentals add to the pressure on longer-term rents by reducing supply, although that is a contested argument in most cities because such rentals also encourage new construction. Short-term rentals also allow visitors to avoid costly hotel rates and have room to spread out. They are rented by people who then walk into local restaurants and businesses and buy stuff or attend live entertainment offerings. Airbnbs tend to draw visitors out of the downtown core and into less affluent neighborhoods, spreading the economic pie beyond the central business district and letting families, especially, save some money and get to know the real heart of a city. In Chicago, for example, there are relatively few hotels outside the center of the city; if you are a jazz fan and want to stay close to the Green Mill, for example, an Airbnb in Uptown would offer you real benefits and you might end up staying longer, or even moving here altogether. We don't see any evidence of Chicago having some massive Airbnb problem; this is a city that needs to its tourist base, not suppress it by killing Airbnbs. We know of few buildings that have been taken over by short-term rentals and we note that large buildings can already restrict such rentals on their own, using existing condo regulations, if they so choose. For sure, there's a danger of people holding parties in these places or using them to drink underage. But some people also behave badly in hotel rooms and private residences. Laws are on the books that can be enforced without preventing the rentals in the first place, and we have no problem with a registration procedure that can help police see if a rental is proving to be a repeat problem. Chicago has many protections in place. If 25% of a precinct's registered voters want to ban short-term rentals and sign a petition, they can do so now. So we see no need whatsoever for the over-reaching ordinance championed by Ald. Anthony Napolitano, 41st, and approved by the Committee on License and Consumer Protection that would give aldermen the power to outright ban Airbnbs by aldermanic fiat and then force Airbnb and its competitors to collect signatures to overturn the ban and stay in business. Imagine if that was proposed for restaurants or hotels! In practice, this would be a field day for NIMBY types (or sly hotel owners) who have an alderman's ear (or the means to boost an aldermanic bank account). In practice, it would mean that short-term rentals would likely disappear all over the city, reducing the side hustles of lots of cash-strapped folks, hurting local businesses, reducing city and state tax revenues and meaning that visitors would have no choice but to stuff themselves and their kids into costly hotel rooms instead of being able to stay where most Chicagoans live. City Council should leave this well alone. If and when the city is overwhelmed with tourists, we're happy to revisit our view. But at this cash-strapped juncture for the city of Chicago, Napolitano's power move should be voted down.
