Empathy as a Marketing Tool: The Cats of Istanbul and the Image-Conversion Gap in Destination Attractiveness
This study analyzes social media discourse surrounding Istanbul's street cats to reveal that while empathy and warmth toward the animals co-produce the city's affective image, these emotional responses are socially divided between local and global audiences and fail to translate into actual visit intentions, highlighting a significant gap between image formation and behavioral conversion.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
When we think about what makes a city attractive to visitors, we usually picture its skyline, its museums, or its famous food. But there is a deeper layer to how we feel about a place, one that involves our emotions and our sense of right and wrong. In the world of travel research, experts have long known that a destination's image is built in stages. First, we learn facts about a place, like its size or its history. Then, those facts spark feelings, such as excitement or relaxation. Finally, those feelings are supposed to lead to a decision to actually go there. For decades, researchers have assumed that if a place makes us feel warm and fuzzy, we will want to visit it. However, a new study suggests that the story is more complicated, especially when it comes to how we treat the animals that share our cities. It turns out that the people who live in a city and the people who dream of visiting it often see the same animal in very different ways, and those feelings do not always translate into a ticket to the airport.
In late May 2026, a stray cat wandered onto the pitch during a major soccer match in Istanbul, Turkey. The game was between Aston Villa and Freiburg, and the cat's unexpected appearance was captured on video. Within hours, that clip traveled across the globe, appearing on social media platforms used by billions of people. While Istanbul is already famous for its street cats, appearing in documentaries and travel guides for years, this specific moment offered a unique chance to watch how people reacted in real time. A researcher gathered over 600 public comments from four different social media sites to see what people were actually saying. They wanted to know three things: what were the main themes in the conversation, how did the feelings of local residents differ from those of international viewers, and did all this positive emotion about the cat actually make people say they wanted to visit Istanbul.
The researcher found that the conversation was split into two distinct camps. The people who live in Istanbul, the locals, tended to talk about the cat as a resident and a neighbor. Their comments focused on ownership and belonging, often framing the cat as the true master of the city while humans were merely guests in its home. More importantly, the locals were the ones who spoke about the moral character of the city. They discussed animal welfare, expressed empathy for the cat's well-being, and even offered a critical voice, pointing out that the romanticized view of the cat might hide the harder realities of street life. They acted as guardians of the city's reputation, ensuring that the image of Istanbul as a humane place was grounded in truth rather than just a cute video.
In contrast, the global audience, the people watching from outside Turkey, focused on the aesthetic and emotional appeal of the moment. Their comments were filled with humor, descriptions of the cat's cuteness, and general warmth. They saw the cat as a mascot or a lucky charm that made the city feel friendly and inviting. While the locals were busy discussing the ethics of animal care and the reality of the city's infrastructure, the international viewers were enjoying the spectacle. The study showed that these two groups were essentially doing different jobs in the conversation: the locals were authenticating the city's moral standing, while the visitors were amplifying its charm and entertainment value.
Despite this flood of positive feelings, the researcher discovered a surprising gap. Even though many people expressed love for the cat and warmth toward the city, very few of them said they wanted to visit. Out of all the comments analyzed, only about two percent mentioned an intention to travel to Istanbul. The data showed that feeling empathy for the animal or finding the situation funny did not lead to a plan to book a trip. The connection between feeling good about a place and actually going there seemed to be broken in this specific context. The positive emotions were abundant, but they stayed as feelings rather than turning into actions.
This finding challenges the common belief that a warm, emotional image of a destination automatically leads to more tourists. The study suggests that while the image of a place is co-created by both residents and visitors, the path from that image to a visit is not a straight line. The locals provide the moral foundation, proving that the city cares for its animals, while visitors enjoy the beauty of that care. However, that enjoyment does not necessarily convert into a travel itinerary. The researcher concludes that for a city like Istanbul, the reputation of being a humane place is a powerful part of its identity, but it is not a direct sales pitch. The love for the cats is real, but it remains a feeling of admiration rather than a promise of a future visit.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.