Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To a much lesser degree, it appears that City Data also over-inflates San Francisco’s prominence worldwide. While it sits at a healthy 7th in online mentions and 5th in visitation market share, according to the data, it is squarely behind Miami and Las Vegas, and possibly Boston. It’s interesting that some assert San Francisco is a top 4 or 5 US city in terms of recognition, but the metrics don’t support that.
?
I still think that SF Bay area is a top 5 area but this confirms what I have been saying for a while, SF have been superboosted on here for a while with people placing it on a level with LA and NY with some even placing it above LA. That just seemed like extreme boosting to me.
Boston has been underboosted to me.
People always seem scandalized when people say SF and ATL are on the same tier when it comes to most talked about and this confirms that they are.
Portland seems unbelievably high though. Higher than DC and on par with Seattle.
Interestingly, the links say that Las Vegas is punching FAR above its weight when it comes to global popularity. Other cities overachieving are Tampa, Portland, Nashville, and Cleveland.
It also discusses some cities that should have large digital visibility, but are underperforming, like DC, Seattle, Charlotte, Orlando, and Honolulu, and the worst offenders: Phoenix, Minneapolis, and Austin.
Fascinating.
The more you dig into it, the more you realize it's a highly flawed methodology for measuring international recognition. There are so many things that don't pass the sniff test.
Sacramento is more internationally recognized than Minneapolis?
Chicago more than LA or Miami?
Detroit and Seattle ahead of Washington DC?
Anyone who has traveled internationally a decent amount should recognize that just makes no sense.
This source is which you keep referencing is heavily, heavily biased towards Europe - which in turn is going to be extremely biased towards Chicago since it has such strong Eastern European roots. If you were to proportionally include Asia (a huge, extremely diverse continent), Latin America, and Australia it would completely change the results. NYC would still be number one, but I'd venture LA, SF, Vegas and Miami would be next on the list. Although those are just guesses.
What I do know is using only this source slants heavily against the West Coast - which are hubs for Asian and LatinX populations. Meanwhile, Chicago flies pretty far under the radar globally, especially given how much it offers. Outside of Eastern Europe, it is not recognized as the powerhouse city that it actually is,
Also, "talked about" is different than "known". As the political hub of the most powerful country in the world, Washington DC is extremely well known, if not talked about or even visited as much as some other cities.
Most people on C-D say that nearly all of Miami’s international prowess is from South and Central America, so if this source is heavily, heavily biased towards Europe, why does it see Miami in a favorable light?
The more you dig into it, the more you realize it's a highly flawed methodology for measuring international recognition. There are so many things that don't pass the sniff test.
Sacramento is more internationally recognized than Minneapolis?
Chicago more than LA or Miami?
Detroit and Seattle ahead of Washington DC?
Anyone who has traveled internationally a decent amount should recognize that just makes no sense.
Whose sniff test? Yours?
In what manner is it highly flawed? Have you created a study researching this topic? I would be very interested to see it.
The more you dig into it, the more you realize it's a highly flawed methodology for measuring international recognition. There are so many things that don't pass the sniff test. Sacramento is more internationally recognized than Minneapolis? Chicago more than LA or Miami? Detroit and Seattle ahead of Washington DC?Anyone who has traveled internationally a decent amount should recognize that just makes no sense.
I think it has a lot to do with publishing.
“Detroit” is a metonymy for the Auto Industry. So they say “Detroit is investing in Electric vehicles”
Not actually about Detroit but it mentions Detroit
Inversely Washington has a lot more “Capitol Hill White House, Pentagon etc” ledes that don’t actually mention the city.
This Detroit is boosted and Washington is lessened.
Also on aGloval scale Chicago above Miami makes sense. South America is the worlds least populous continent (excluding Austrialia and Antartica)
The more you dig into it, the more you realize it's a highly flawed methodology for measuring international recognition. There are so many things that don't pass the sniff test.
Sacramento is more internationally recognized than Minneapolis?
Chicago more than LA or Miami?
Detroit and Seattle ahead of Washington DC?
Anyone who has traveled internationally a decent amount should recognize that just makes no sense.
Seriously. It's obviously flawed when Detroit and Seattle are above DC here. I'm sure even Seattle posters would find that strange.
The more you dig into it, the more you realize it's a highly flawed methodology for measuring international recognition. There are so many things that don't pass the sniff test.
Sacramento is more internationally recognized than Minneapolis?
Chicago more than LA or Miami?
Detroit and Seattle ahead of Washington DC?
Anyone who has traveled internationally a decent amount should recognize that just makes no sense.
Sacramento because its the capital of California.
Chicago because of gun violence
Detroit because blight Seattle becuas esome of the biggest and most transformational countries in the history of the universe are based/founded there. And its growth
Detroit because blight Seattle becuas esome of the biggest and most transformational countries in the history of the universe are based/founded there. And its growth
?
I still don't see that as a reason why Sacramento would be ahead here. Or Seattle over DC with these reasons.
“Detroit” is a metonymy for the Auto Industry. So they say “Detroit is investing in Electric vehicles”
Not actually about Detroit but it mentions Detroit
Inversely Washington has a lot more “Capitol Hill White House, Pentagon etc” ledes that don’t actually mention the city.
This Detroit is boosted and Washington is lessened.
Also on aGloval scale Chicago above Miami makes sense. South America is the worlds least populous continent (excluding Austrialia and Antartica)
Exactly - and the more you dig into and find things like this (i.e. Chicago is also the name of a popular band, movie, and play, while Los Angeles and Miami are not), the more you realize it's not a good proxy for city recognition.
Meanwhile, Washington can mean so many things - the President, numerous streets named Washington, Washington State, etc. - that I imagine they had to be very strict and only include mentions when people said "DC" or "Washington DC". A lot of people just call Washington DC "Washington", but I bet those didn't count.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
