Visit Malaysia 2026 campaign stirs up controversy around places featured and mascot origin

Tourism, arts and culture minister Tiong King Sing has reportedly called for a redo on the Visit Malaysia Year 2026 (VM2026) promotional video after netizens commented that the launch video did not include mosques, sparking controversy.

The new promotional video, said the minister, will include more details to effectively promote each state and will be aired in a week's time. It will also be divided by zones so that travellers can understand what attractions each state offers. This is so to not cause confusion for foreign tourists who may not know which attraction belongs to which state, Tiong said at an engagement session with tourism industry players on Thursday, reported The Star. 

Tiong has also asked all state governments to cooperate and supply the ministry with information regarding their tourism destinations, products, tour packages and signature dishes, so that it may be highlighted in the promotional video. 

Don't miss: How can KL rebuild its reputation post the sinkhole emergence?

In tandem, the minister stated that the 41-second video, which has sparked controversy on social media, is not the video that will be used for promotional purposes. The video which was used during the launch of the VM2026 logo, mascot, theme song and aircraft design did not feature mosques which caused the chatter. It did however feature other places of worship including the Batu Caves in Selangor and an old church in Melaka.

Malaysia is a multiracial country with a dominant Muslim population. According to the department of statistics Malaysia in 2020, 63.5% of the population practices Islam.

Meanwhile, the video, which was also posted on the Tourism Malaysia's official Facebook page, reportedly featured other popular tourist destinations such as the Kuala Lumpur's Chinatown, Central market and Langkawi skywalk in Kedah. Checks by A+M revealed that the video has since been deleted.

In a statement to Malaysia Now, a press aide to Tiong said that the non-Muslim places of worships depicted were tourist attractions, adding that the Malay martial arts of silat was also depicted in the video. In response to criticism, Tiong reportedly said that netizens should not politicise the issue or turn it into a religious or race matter. Saying that, Tiong explained that his team is open to receiving constructive feedback and criticism from various parties.

The minister also urged tourism agencies to take full responsibility for ensuring the safety of tourists, including providing two tour busses for long-distance journeys, no more than eight hours of work and drug-free tour bus drivers.

According to media intelligence firm CARMA, while there were negative associations with the campaign, netizens praised the video for promoting Malaysian culture, natural beauty, and uniqueness to international tourists. The majority of the posts discussed Visit Malaysia 2026’s associated logo, mascot, and theme song, said CARMA. However, on 9 Jan, there was a small uptick in mentions when netizens commented that the launch video did not include mosques. The mentions of the lack of a mosque and use of AI made up about 8% of the whole campaign, stated CARMA.

Meanwhile, DATAXET Nama found that the overall sentiment online regarding the mosque exclusion was 95% negative and 5% positive. Many comments (35%) expressed frustration over the lack of mosques, which they feel are essential representations of Malaysia's Islamic identity. Some comments (25%) emphasised the need to represent Malaysia's diverse cultures and religions better while another 20% criticised the tourism ministry for its perceived insensitivity and poor decision-making regarding the video content. Some called for accountability and even the resignation of the tourism minister.

Meanwhile, 10% of comments specifically called for accountability from the tourism ministry regarding the decision to exclude mosques. They questioned the leadership and decision-making processes within the ministry, reflecting a desire for greater responsibility in representing Malaysia's cultural identity. 5% of netizens suggested taking action such as reporting the video or demanding a revision while an equal 5% appreciated the video but mentioned that it could be improved by including iconic mosques such as Putrajaya or Kristal Mosque, said DATAXET Nama. 

In addition, the VM2026 video triggered a strong emotional and critical response, underscoring deeper societal expectations and issues.

Keywords such as 'complain', 'angry', and 'doubt' in its word cloud reflect the erosion of trust in the promotional campaign and its creators. The exclusion of symbolic landmarks has led netizens to question the intentions, authenticity, and competence of those involved. This distrust is further exacerbated by a perceived carelessness and insensitivity in government campaigns further intensifying calls for more culturally sensitive and inclusive content.

Mascots questioned for originality

The promotional video was not the only element from the VM2026 campaign that received criticism. Following the campaign launch, netizens were seen accusing the artist of mascots Wira and Manja of using AI.

In a post on X, a graphic artist known as Emes Zack (@emes_zack) asked if the mascots were created by AI. A fellow X user by the name Emy (@Muhdhelmiyani) who identified himself as the original artist's son said that it is not AI and that it is an original drawing. Emy also attached a photo of a desk with test designs of the mascot in several poses. 

Yet, Emes doubled down, adding that "we actually really love the design so if there's proof that it is now AI please do share, unfortunately putting multiple designs on your table doesn't proof anything." Another X user @corre1310 responded to the post by Emy, saying "sorry but still skeptical, all this looks exactly the same but printed, the background portrait looks like a filter. I'm only convinced if he drops proper concept art/design with description to justify why they decide as such, just as any professional graphic artist/designer would." 

A+M has reached out to Emy for a statement. 

In a separate post, Emy also addressed media and apologised for not replying to all the comments and direct messages he's received regarding the matter, adding that "this logo is not 100% under my dad's ownership as he is working under a company, so I cannot make any decisions on my own." Emy explained that it is enough that people know that the mascots were not AI, but an original drawing by his father. 

This isn't the first time netizens have questioned the use of AI in artworks used in campaigns by national agencies or companies. In February last year, Malaysia Airlines stirred up conversations around authenticity when it used generative AI for its Chinese New Year post. In prior conversations with A+M, industry professionals said that there are still sensitivities regarding the use of AI, adding that unhappy consumers were possibly disappointed to see true Malaysian brands with culture and talent at its disposal resorting to AI for its creative expressions. 

Related articles:  
George Town Festival takes down promo videos amid inclusitivity concerns, issues apology 
Malaysia Airlines looks to attract Melbourne folks with tram wraps  
Malaysia Airlines' attempt to use AI stirs up conversations around authenticity