Add CategoryReview sites like Tripadvisor play a vital role in modern travel. Whether it’s a new restaurant around the corner or a hotel on the other side of the world, it can be invaluable to see what other people thought of the place.
Like any data, it can be manipulated but when there are hundreds or more reviews, you can get a pretty solid idea of what you’re in for. The stars don’t lie.
Until they do. Which brings us to the fore the question: are there some destinations that should be beyond review? Sacrosanct due to the tragedy that took place there and the emotion they invoke as a result.
For many travellers (but especially Jews like myself) a day trip to a World War II concentration camp is as unforgettable as it is important.
RELATED: ‘Do not stay here. Ever’: Australia’s ‘worst’ motel being sold
RELATED: Bad tourists may have ruined this Italian icon
It underlies not only the relative recency of the events it commemorates but also proves that travel can beyond extend the fun and into the profound. Experiences after which we can take home a greater sense of compassion, humanity or insight.
Go somewhere like Dachau, Bergen-Belsen or Auschwitz and it immediately becomes apparent they have been preserved with the utmost sensitivity, objectivity and devotion to not airbrushing any of their inherent horror. Their home countries should be applauded for this.
And yet, people feel compelled to rag on them on travel review sites. As if they were a restaurant where the bread was stale.
RELATED: World’s worst tourists put on notice
What follows are some real and gobsmackingly inappropriate reviews of such facilities from travellers who needed to get certain disappointments off their (entitled) chests.
We’ve included images for no other reason so you can see the environments which prompted these. We’ve also chosen not to identify the names of these reviewers because quite frankly they clearly have enough problems already.
Without further ado, on a site where we love a list of Top Things, we present the absolute worst. These were collected from just two locations – Dachau and Auschwitz.
The headline: ‘Nothing special’
Score: 3/5
The review: “I’m sure there are better places to see in Munich. The place was average with nothing much to see. Everything there is easily available to be seen online.”
The headline: ‘Total waste of time Viator tour’
Score: 1/5
The review: “We and others spent four hours standing and listening to a rather intense young man … who gave us an absolute overdose of knowledge.”
The headline: ‘Great chance, but missed’
Score: 3/5
The review: “It could be done better, Auschwitz is far, far interesting and gloomier.”
The headline: ‘Disappointing tour of a harrowing location’
Score: 3/5
The review: “Walking under the famous gate of Auschwitz wasn’t depressing as I thought it would be. There were too many big groups CROWDING [our caps] the concentration camp. Nothing shocked me, other than the pile of human hair. I had seen worse on TV and the internet.”
The headline: ‘Not as I expected’
Score: 3/5
The review: “I have seen more camps and this one is not in my top 5.”
The headline: ‘Rainy tour in crowds’
The score: 3/5
The review: “An hour ride in a cramped van.”
The headline: ‘July 13’
The score: 1/5
The review: “The tour is long with very little time to rest, which gave me a bad back. I really wouldn’t recommend going here.”
The headline: ‘Feels tacky and like a tourist trap’
The score: 2/5.
The review: “The entire time I was there it felt like no one was in charge. Staff walking about in jeans and T-shirt. I think I seen 2 members of staff in an identifiable ‘uniform’.”
This article originally appeared on Escape and was reproduced with permission