By: Kiron Lebeck
Reading of genocide, torture, and indiscriminate murder leaves one with a sad image that is soon forgotten, but actually seeing pictures of people affected by these atrocities leaves a permanent imprint in one’s mind. While this is an extreme circumstance, this kind of visual data has been made widely available through the democratization of geographic information.
Image from the Rwandan Genocide (Gasmonso, 2006, November 13)
Democratization is an enabler; it brings more information to the people and, by doing so, gives them more power to act. Through the use of programs like Google Earth, people can spread and receive information across the geo-web, a term coined for the integration of visual and textual information online. Although this highly accessible data yields compelling benefits for both users and non-users of the geo-web, only the limited numbers of geo-web users actually have direct access to this information. According to Bodum and Jaegly (2006), “Everyone – in places where the technology is available – can potentially publish his or her own information” (p. 237). The freedom to spread one’s own opinions and knowledge to large numbers of people through the Internet is limited only to those with, essentially, an Internet connection. Internet World Stats: Usage and Population Statistics breaks down the worldwide usage of the Internet as of June 30, 2010, into several regions, demonstrating that internet usage is proportionally highest in more developed areas, such as North America, Europe, and Australia.
Despite their inherent disadvantage, those with limited access to geographic information can, in fact, benefit from the democratization of information indirectly. In a Mongabay (2009) interview, David Tryse described the implications of several Google Earth applications that he created for conservation efforts. He stated, “It’s impossible to care about something if you don’t know it exists” (Mongabay, 2009). Tryse also proclaimed:
“In seconds anyone can zoom in to see the huge fires from Shell’s gas-flaring operations in the Nigerian delta or follow the discolored toxic runoff along a hundred kilometers of rain forest river downstream from a goldmine in Peru or Indonesian Papua.” (Mongabay, 2009)
Example of Shell's gas flaring in Nigeria
Conservationists and humanitarian activists that use Tryse’s applications, combining textual data and visual, geographic information, may gain better insight into causes they never would have been exposed to otherwise. In turn, their efforts could benefit the disadvantaged people living in regions like the Nigerian delta or Indonesian Papua who lack Internet access. This process represents a trickle-down approach to spreading and applying information, relying on those with direct access to geographical information to dispense their knowledge among less privileged people elsewhere.
Democratized information can facilitate crucial environmental and humanitarian efforts, but the broader implications reach people on a much more personal level. They denote a responsibility of those fortunate enough to access this information to act on it. The usefulness of geographic information extends only as far as people are willing to apply it, leaving room for activists and average people alike to impact their own lives, the lives of others, and the world as a whole.
References:
Rhett A. Butler, mongabay.com (March 31,2009). Development of Google Earth a watershed moment for the environment. http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0401-tryse_interview_google_earth.html
Bodum, L. & Jaegly, M. (2006). The Democratizing Potential of Geographic Exploration Systems (GES). In A. Abdul-Rahman, S. Zlatanova, & V. Coors (Eds.), Innovations in 3d geo information systems (pp. 236-239). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Gasmonso (2006, November 13). Retrieved from http://religiousfreaks.com/2006/11/13/another-catholic-nun-jailed-for-genocide/
Your description of a “trickle-down” approach to solving conservation/humanitarian issues does well to characterize the way in which you see accessibility as it relates to responding to the problems you raise. I’m not sure, though, that the dissemination of information–”freedom to spread one’s own opinions and knowledge to large numbers of people through the Internet is limited only to those with, essentially, an Internet connection,” as you put it–is that simple. In heavily state-controlled countries, China for instance (which has the most rapidly growing online market on the planet), I don’t think you will find nearly as much free-spirited journalism as you would, say, in a Western country. As the technology stands now, it is not clear how Google Earth (and its counterparts) can be used to address some of the issues you raise, like genocide or human rights. Certainly, images can stir people more so than can words, but say someone come across pictures of refugees from the conflict in Darfur–how would they then use geobrowser software in developing solutions to the issue?
As far as the issues of human rights and genocide go, I agree with Ryan in that I am not sure how exactly Google Earth could help solve these issues. With these issues changing so rapidly, varying from day to day even, Google Earth images that Google has said are 3 or more months old probably wouldn’t be of much help. While it could give someone a look into, say, a secretive prison, it would still be hard to say that some type of human rights violation is actually occurring there based on a satellite image without a significant amount of detail. While eventually, using virtual globes for this use could become more practical, at its current state, much more work is needed for these idealized uses to become realities.
I agree with your idea that it it’s not just the privileged countries that stand to benefit from the democratization of geographic information. I also like your conclusion that the countries that possess the technology to use the software are the ones that must decide to what extent they will use it to benefit the poorer nations. Your quote from Bodum and Jaegly, (2006)—“Everyone – in places where the technology is available – can potentially publish his or her own information”—helps point out how easy it is for people who have internet to use the software, while some poor countries don’t even have access. It’s up to us to decide how to use it to benefit the world as a whole.
@Kiron: You do a great job of introducing this topic and recognizing how bringing Google Earth to the people would be beneficial from a conservationist’s standpoint, although I think that Ryan brings up a good point: what can virtual globes do to solve the problem? How can we use Google Earth to our advantage to help under-developed populations who don’t have access to this great resource?
Also, though you explain very clearly the benefits of the democratization of geo-browser software, you don’t mention much about the consequences, inaccurate information being one of the many dangers of data sharing, which can lead to dangerous situations as well.
I thought your argument for the use of visual information as a motivation to act on issues around the world was very strong. I also agree when you say, “Democratization is an enabler; it brings more information to the people and, by doing so, gives them more power to act,” I think you highlighted well how geo-information in the form of a virtual globe serves as an inspiration for people to help others or the planet. In response to Ryan’s comment, I believe the point was that a geobrowser software would be used as a motivation for developing solutions to such problems, and not necessarily a basis for making decisions.
I think your point about the Rwandan genocide is especially poignant. It is true that the visual representation of the most catastrophic events have the most significant effect on the common man and woman. By viewing these horrific images, people will be more inclined to act or at least, care about the issues. And because of the Google Earth’s widespread, growing audience, many more people can experience “first-hand” what is going on in the world. And the people with google earth tend to have a higher financial background and therefore may have the ability to act. Therefore, the “democratization” of Google Earth can have a positive effect even for those who cannot access the program. Although the “democratization” of this program is not true as most of the people on this Earth still do not have access to this program, it is certainly true that by educating the internet-accessed public can and will have positive effects on the world.
the visual information is a bit overwhelming.
but great points.