10,000 Jobs Created in Michigan, But Not by Rick

Michigan Messenger has reported that 10,000 jobs were created in Michigan, but Rick Snyder's $1.7 billion tax cut for businesses had nothing to do with it.

Instead, it was Gov. Jennifer Granholm's spending on the Pure Michigan ad campaign that did the trick.

A study commissioned by the U.S. Travel Association found out-of-state leisure travel jumped 21 percent in 2010, the second year of the Pure Michigan national advertising campaign. THe $6.4 billion in spending allowed the travel industry to add 10,000 jobs.

The study also found that in the first year of the national advertising campaign, spending by out-of-state visitors brought $138 billion into the state's coffers. That was more than three times what the state spent on the program.

Pretty good rate of return.

Granholm's Program Gets Standing Ovation

Rick Snyder is getting all kinds of plaudits -- not for his own policies, but for one of former Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm's programs.

The Detroit Free Press says the tourism industry gave Snyder a standing ovation because he agreed to fund the Pure Michigan tourism ad campaign for $25 million. The program actually started under Granholm and has been hailed as a standout state tourism campaign.

The newspaper, of course, failed to mention that Snyder's predecessor started the campaign.

Wouldn't want to dull any of the luster for the newspaper's candidate, would they?

So Now Snyder Is OK with Picking Winners and Losers

Government shouldn't pick winners and losers. Seems like I've heard that a lot lately from Rick Snyder's administration. It's his rationale for taxing poor people and old people, for ending tax breaks, for driving a new industry out of the state.

So it was a surprise to see him saying good things about the Pure Michigan advertising campaign on Thursday (March 10, 2011) when he signed into law a bill giving it an additional $10 million for advertising Michigan.

Didn't Snyder just pick some winners and create some losers when he took tax dollars and gave it to a particular industry? Why is that OK? People outside the golf course, hotel, restaurant, and gasoline industry are never going to see any benefit from that government spending. They're seeing their tax money go to helping another industry and that's bad, bad, bad. Blah, blah, blah. Especially since under Snyder's tax proposals, most of those businesses benefiting from Pure Michigan are the type that will never pay a dime of taxes to the state to help cover the cost. The studies that show Pure Michigan giving a huge return on its spending are the same kind that show the movie industry doing the same thing, yet those are discounted.

So for some reason that Snyder won't tell us, it is OK to pick winners and losers sometimes. Whenever he says it is.

Not So Pure Michigan Purely Funny

The fantastic, jobs-creating "Pure Michigan" ad campaign did get an extension from the Michigan Legislature. And I'll bet the creators of this spoof are glad

Clever, but I disagree with the part about the salt truck. In my experience, Michigan uses LOTS of salt. But I'll grant them poetic license.

Comparing Apples and Oranges on 'Pure Michigan'

Would anyone compare the purchasing power of General Motors to that of a local diner or the local gas station?

Of course not. They're not the same. Yet that's what the Livingston Press and Argus did in its story on an imagined "debate" over the merits of the Pure Michigan ad campaign.

The story features no real debate at all in terms of the campaign. How could it? The program is a winner for the state, returning $2.33 in sales tax revenue for each $1 spent in advertising Michigan as a tourism attraction nationwide. The only debate is in the reporter's mind, who tries to create controversy by encouraging readers to be "outraged" over non-existent state advertising for General Motors products after failing to find anyone to make that statement for him.

At its heart, the story shows a basic inability or refusal to understand the nature of the tourism industry. Michigan's tourism industry is not made up of two or three huge companies fully capable of financing national advertising. It's made up of thousands of small enterprises that benefit whenever people from outside the local community come and spend money -- local restaurants, gas stations, campgrounds, motels, golf courses, gift shops, local museums, and so on. Individually, they simply cannot afford to advertise nationally the way General Motors and Ford can. Yet they all pay taxes to the state of Michigan in one way or another and provide jobs. The state benefits from their existence. It seems entirely reasonable that the state would help them thrive by doing something they cannot possibly do on their own -- advertising on their behalf nationally. Especially when it doesn't cost the state in the long run to do this.

The comparison to the beef industry check-off program also is misguided. That's a national program -- cattle raisers all over the nation contribute to that, not just those from one state. And of course, the beef check-off program is a government program, overseen by the USDA, even though the money comes from $1 a head from the producers. You can read about it here. Another off-the-mark comparison.

Instead of manufacturing outrage over non-existent state advertising for GM, the newspaper out to be reflecting disgust for the job-killing Republican State Senate.

It Pays to Advertise--Unless It's by Dems

It pays to advertise.

That's what newspapers tell businesses over and over. Take out an ad in our newspaper and your business will go up. Having a sale? Take out an ad and tell people about it. Running for office? Run an ad to tell people about yourself. Run an ad, run an ad, run an ad. Pages of newspapers have tons of ads and little holes left over for the news -- newsholes, they're called.

So I was a little surprised to read in the Livingston Press and Argus recently (Feb. 16, 2010) that the newspaper wants proof that the Pure Michigan advertising campaign, which is one of the loveliest pieces of state advertising I have ever seen, needs to prove that it boosts tourism in the state.

Funny, I've never been given that kind of proof when I place a classified ad in the local paper, or when the newspaper comes and asks me to place ads before elections. Not once was I shown a study that proved anything about the effectiveness of advertising in their paper as opposed to advertising for free on Craig's List or in the Marketeer.

But now that Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm is placing the ads, the local paper is up in arms and demands proof that advertising works.

Wonder if they would be so suspicious if the ads were running in their pages?