30 years ago, Dean Maccannell wrote this:

The touristic critic of tourism is not an analysis of tourism: it’s part of the problem (…) The touristic critic of tourism is based on the desire to outpower other “simple” tourists and reach a deeper appreciation of society and culture (…) All tourists want, at some point, this deeper commitment with society and culture; it’s a basic component of the motivation to travel.

Maccannell summarizes in this paragraph the eternal critic of the “traveler” over “tourists”. That is, that the traveler knows how travel better since, apparently, he has a “better understanding of the world”. That they use the same means of transportation and that they use the same payment systems in hotels and hostels are things that are usually overlooked. Against certain common senses, the mobility of the “traveler” around the world does not deserve to be studied differently than the “tourist’s”. Because, for those of us who play analysts, there’s a basic point to be respected: not to assume as obvious the perspective of the interviewed, the one who is part of the object of study. Methodologically, the “traveler’s” justification of “why they are better than tourists” shouldn’t be looked as an analytical form to approach the tourism field. In fact, these descriptions are part of the travel and tourism field, and should be analyzed as any other kind of document or text.

Dean Maccannell’s cite was taken from his book The tourist, originally published in 1976 and translated to spanish by Editorial Melusina in 2003.