When, in 1994, a group of computer graphics professionals developed the Virtual Reality Modeling Language (VRML), a necessity for sophisticated programming skills overshadowed its potential for greatness. Since then, the emergence of virtual globes such as Google Earth has democratized, that is to say has made easily accessible and applicable to the average citizen, this geographic information. The implications of the democratization of information are immense; this new technology is propagating knowledge and affecting people, or at least has the potential to, of all demographics both directly and indirectly.
In his Digital Earth speech, Al Gore expressed his vision of a virtual globe which would “turn a flood of raw data into understandable information about our society and planet” (Bodum and Jaegly, Democratization of geo-information: GES, 2006). The democratization of information has achieved just that, and has furthermore helped realized Michael Jone’s, creator of Earth Viewer (later to become Google Earth), goal of developing cultural literacy. A prime example is the fourteen masterpieces from Madrid’s Prado Museum that are now available to be scrutinized at a resolution in which the individual brushstrokes and seams in the canvas can be seen. Supporters of this new application of Google Earth stress “the ways in which [this new technology] will “democratize” access to these great works of European art,” exposing anyone with internet to the world of fine art (Abend, par 7, 2009).
A detailed view of Las Meninas on Google Earth
Michael Jones’ other hope for his user-friendly virtual globe was to foster global awareness. “It’s impossible to care about something if you don’t know it exists,” said David Tryse, who has developed several Google Earth KMLs (Keyhole Markup Language) dedicated to spreading information about the environmental issues plaguing our world (Butler, par 3, 2009). Tryse details how with a click of the mouse anyone can zoom in and see huge fires in Nigeria, toxins spreading in the rivers of the rainforest in Peru and Indonesian Papua, or even the dilapidated and torched villages of Darfur.
A Google Earth image of a burning village in Darfur
Skeptics argue that while the democratization of information is advantageous for those with access to the Internet and computers, the rest of the world is excluded from these benefits. This video provides information about just a few heroes of Google Earth – average people who learned about global issues they possibly would have not otherwise been exposed to, and have since taken it as their responsibility to make changes. Perhaps it is optimistic and idealistic to believe that the democratization of geographic information will benefit those in developed and undeveloped nations alike, however, the potential is undeniably there and this new technology has the ability to impact the entire world if those fortunate enough to be exposed are willing to take action.
As Bodum and Jaegly describe, “information, and especially geographic information participates not only in understanding the world, but also in shaping it” (2006). Google Earth is far from reaching its potential; nonetheless, democratization of information has and will continue to have broad implications for our world.
References
Abend, L. (2009, Jan. 15). Google Earth Takes On the Prado’s Masterworks. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1871656,00.html
Bodum, L. & Jaegly, M. (2006). The Democratizing Potential of Geographic Exploration Systems (GES). In A. Abdul-Rahman, S. Zlatanova, S.Zlatanova, & V. Coors (Eds.), Innovations in 3D geo information systems (pp. 236-239). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Butler, R.A. (2009, March 31). Development of Google Earth a watershed moment for the environment. Retrieved from http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0401-tryse_interview_google_earth.html
Erika did a great job arguing that the democratization of Google Earth has improved and enriched our lives. To this end, she discussed several positive consequences of democratization, including an increased awareness of world affairs and the ability to view faraway parts of the world. In my opinion, Erika’s argument in favor of democratization was strongest when she addressed the criticisms of democratization, such as the belief that virtual globes’ accessibility aids terrorism. By addressing and refuting these criticisms, Erika added validity to her argument. I think Erika’s position would be further strengthened if she better explained the concepts of democratization, accessibility, and virtual globes. With a better understanding of these terms, the reader would have a clearer conception of democratization’s consequences. In addition, I would omit the section that says that David Tryse is neither a conservationist nor an ecologist. Since his background is in IT, the inclusion of his profession demonstrates neither the accessibility nor the democratization of geographic information.
This is a very strong response to the readings and a well-done first draft. In terms of structure, the paper flows very logically from one idea to the next without jumping around too much. Furthermore, the quotes used from the readings are all highly appropriate and really help develop your argument. In addition, you have done a thorough job of citing your sources where appropriate and giving credit where it is due.
To improve this paper I suggest remembering that you are speaking to an audience who is very unfamiliar with Google Earth or any kind of geographical software. While I appreciate that you very clearly state your claim from the very beginning of the paper, you reference the “democratization of geographical information” without ever giving any kind of definition of what this means. Additionally, while you make some excellent points, be careful not to get caught repeating the same ideas from the class discussions.
Overall I think this is a very good start to the paper and it clearly demonstrates your position about the benefits of the democratization of geographical information. Be sure to include original ideas in your argument and not get caught summarizing from the readings.
Hi Erika
I’m one of the alumni readers. (Just FYI!)
I enjoyed the strong start of your post. Personally, I find quotes and stories useful to draw me into a piece of writing, especially since I read many things during the day. It offers a bit of “voice.”
I’m not sure your argument about the value of application of Google Earth data was as compelling for me. I work a lot with online content and one challenge we are seeing is that people are looking at the content, but fewer are moving to action. Did you find any data about the percentage of data consumption that leads to activism? That would be really interesting.
The counterpoints did not come across as strongly as your start. You mentioned privacy and security with little elaboration. I also got a little twinged about the secondary value to those who had no internet access. Much of my work is in developing countries and I’m afraid we of the “developed” world can be patronizing. It is a tough place – wanting to help, but sometimes that help isn’t so helpful. Oops- I’m now guilty of going off track. (Does it matter that this is hour 12 of my work day? No, no excuses!)
Finally – good closing quote. Now I’d love to see all of you tackle what “democratizing information” really means and who is benefiting!
Thanks
Nancy
Your post is visually appealling with the two diverse photos, youtube link and references at the end.
I enjoyed your injection of art into the discussion along with humanitarian issues such as the genocide in Darfur. Your paragraph on the sceptics is rather long, and I’d have preferred seeing the three defensible points bulleted or separated with the concise rebuttal you’ve provided each.
This has given me some to think about and I appreciate that.
There’s a lot to explore further in the assertion that increased access/action form the central motif of Google Earth’s many impacts – and the inclusion of such disparate examples as the fires in Darfur (environmental impact) and masterpieces from the Prado (art) progress that argument well. They begin to illustrate and tease out ways to get beyond the surface (excuse the pun), of being able to “see” the geography virtually (more than a picture book or old-fashion “atlas”). The question from that would be whether or not there is active use of Google Earth to develop solutions or plans for impacting living conditions in impoverished, underdeveloped or overwhelmed areas of the world… ie is someone (from afar) interacting through Google Earth in planning housing options, clean water infrastructure, agriculture alternatives, etc.?
I really liked your introduction because it showed the various ways people can get involved in very few words. I also appreciated your point about the increase in computer addicts and your point about how third world countries benefit from Google Earth indirectly. I think that it is definitely true not just for people but for animals as well, such as the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Google Earth seems to affect everybody in one way or another. I only wonder if seeing these disasters on virtual globes will generate as much help as we hope. Just think about how many people see these disasters on the news and do not react in any way.