I wonder if the writer is aware of Filmport. No Universal Studios, but it should attract tourists.
I find that many Torontonians are far too easy to be down on the city. People need to get more excited about what Toronto has to offer and express that to potential tourists.
I think you're right, syn, though I would identify the problem more with journalists than with your average citizen. I work in the media, and know that bad news sells, but the obsession of the local press in Toronto with doom-and-gloom is really excessive, and I can't explain it. Let's take that National Post story as an example. Here are your facts, grossly simplified.
1. Visits by Americans to Toronto are down significantly, in a financial context that discourages them from visiting as well as the passport/foreign travel thing.
2. Visits by people from much further afield are way up, which is a consistent trend.
3. Overall visits are, as a result, up.
As a dutiful member of the metro desk at a large Toronto paper, do you
a) write a story on how while short drive-in visits from the depressed communities of the American rust belt are down visits from people overseas--who since they are willing to go far have a wide range of destinations to choose from--are up, suggesting that Toronto's global profile is growing significantly
or
b) write a story claiming that the tourist industry is on the verge of collapse, and quote some people who are obviously completely ignorant of events in their city to back up your thesis
(by the by, visitors from overseas stay longer and therefore spend more money).
I would argue that in most cities of Toronto's size and situation (big and booming) the answer would be the second option. But in TO it's the first, or its equivalent, every time. I mean, that's really, really weird.
I love Toronto, but I am really starting to lose patience with the self-hating press. Think of what Jerry Seinfeld would call the Martian test: if creatures from another planet with no knowledge of Toronto were to evaluate it from afar based on the coverage in its own media outlets--ostensibly an authoritative source, what would they conclude? Probably that it was economically depressed, crime-ridden, boring, ugly, covered in trash, perpetually 'in decline,' either as a whole or in various component parts, utterly devoid of tourists, hopelessly provincial, and on and on and on as goes the daily drumbeat from the various papers, though The Globe is generally better than the others on this file.
I'm not suggesting the city doesn't have serious problems, problems which the press can and should identify and comment on. But when story after story (and, of course, column after column) is spun to present the worst possible situation, often with blatant disregard for actual facts, you have to wonder what's going on and why.
