Google Using Pre-Katrina Imagery on Google Maps

Thirdsin writes "CNN reports that images of lands devastated by Hurricane Katrina have been replaced on Google's map service with pre-Hurricane Katrina imagery. Now a subcommittee from The House Committee on Science and Technology has asked CEO Eric Schmidt for Google's motivation behind the imagery switch. '[Congressional subcommittee chair Brad] Miller asked Google to brief his staff by April 6 on who made the decision to replace the imagery with pre-Katrina images, and to disclose if Google was contacted by the city, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Geological Survey or any other government entity about changing the imagery. "To use older, pre-Katrina imagery when more recent images are available without some explanation as to why appears to be fundamentally dishonest," Miller said.' It is worth pointing out that images from Google Earth have not been changed."

I find it hard to believe anything malicious

[catbutt]

is going on.

Everyone loves a good conspiracy theory, but I'd be willing to bet it was simply decided based on quality/resolution of images, and some underling working on it didn't really think about the fact that it the imagery in question is significantly different from how it looks now.

What-the?

[Etherwalk]

Are you kidding? Our Congress is investigating why google has made a change in its maps? And they're fishing for someone to start a political brawl with?

Don't we have... I don't know, something related to government services that they should be doing? Or, if it's going to be related to business, related to business that has a significant impact on consumers? Or poverty? Or taxes? Or services? Or the debt? We (as a nation) have a nine trillion dollar credit card debt, and we're worried about whether google's mapping decision was something we can get into a political scuffle about?

just use Google Earth

[nanosquid]

Who knows why they changed it? Who cares? I suspect Google management has better things to do than to sit around discussing whether to put up pre- or post-Katrina images.

Just use Google Earth if you're going to do anything GIS-related.

4-dimensional imagery

[davidwr]

Someday Google will combine satellite, airplane and ground-level imagery to give limited 3-D flythrough maps.

Add add animation for changes over time and presto you've got a 4-D map!

Maybe this is the non-working mock-up prototype???

Sheesh, Google Maps is worse where I live

[Anonymous Coward]

The area looks like a green blob, and it's missing roads that have been constructed in the last couple of years. If Congress wants to stick their nose into it, why don't they tell the military to do a one-meter scan of the entire U.S., and just give the pictures to Google? Giving a company an unfunded mandate for your own political benefit doesn't sit very well with me.

Re:What-the?

[Amiga Trombone]

I tend to agree with you that this is a waste of time....but the government actually can do more than one thing at once.

That is no doubt true, but the question still remains - what makes this an issue requiring the involvement of government? I fail to see how it's any of the government's business what kind of images Google posts.

Re:I find it hard to believe anything malicious

[lawpoop]

"but I'd be willing to bet it was simply decided based on quality/resolution of images, and some underling working on it didn't really think about the fact that it the imagery in question is significantly different from how it looks now."

I'd like to take you up on your bet.

If google regularly revises its images on google maps, sometimes rolling them back in time for reasons of quality or resolution, I'd believe it. I doubt that any American would mistakenly upload old images of New Orleans, no matter their seniority or expertise, given what a giant story Katrina was. If it was a simple underling's error, why hasn't it been rolled back yet?

One factor you are ignoring is that by using old images, they have made their maps less accurate. The idea of a map is that you know where you are and what the things around you look like. Imagine they had access to super hi-rez satellite images from the 1980s. Should they use them? They *do* have higher resolution ...

Of course not! Lots has changed and been built in the US since the 1980s. You would just be creating a very hi-rez, inaccurate map. Who needs that? Who cares if you have higher-rez images of the past? You don't want them on a current map.

The fact is that the fallout from Katrina, and the fact that very little has improved two years later, is a serious blight on America's image as a first-world-nation. You expect this kind of thing in Africa or South America. I don't have any evidence for my particular interpretation, but you certainly don't have any for yours.

Google can do what they want, *but*...

[ClayJar]

Google can do whatever they want, but you have to admit, it seems odd to revert to an older set of imagery. As there was nothing obviously wrong with the existing post-Katrina imagery as far as end users could tell, there isn't any obvious explanation.

While Google can do whatever they want, *if* some government agency or official asked them to revert to older maps (not that anyone would *ever* try to whitewash their pathetic failures or anything), that would be something to investigate. (We have a long history of corruption in Louisiana, especially New Orleans, and FEMA... well, there are plenty of reasons people in Louisiana hate FEMA.)

Anyway, Google did nothing wrong by reverting to older imagery, but if they did so on the request of some pathetic loser of a politician (or agency), we would *really* like to know so we can show them in no uncertain terms that we find that unacceptable for any public official.

As a consumer...

[hedgemage]

As a consumer of Google products, I would like the information they provide to be as accurate, up to date, and as high a quality as possible.
If I bought a 2007 Thomas Guide map book and found that the maps it contained were less up-to-date than a previous version, I'd be pretty cheesed off. If Google is going to provide maps, they should be responsible enough to keep those maps reasonably up-to-date. The hurricane substantially altered significant areas of not just New Orleans, but the coastline and delta. If they have reverted to a less accurate map, then they are providing a disservice to their customers. Error or otherwise, it should be resolved.

Re:As a consumer...

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Google Earth imagery is worth every penny you paid for it. You paid zero pennies for it and so at this point, you take what they give you or go use an alternative services. Both yahoo and msft are also offering sattelite imagery. Feel free to use them. But if you want to be guaranteed that the imagery you get is the most uptodate and accurate one, be prepared shell out some real money.

Re:Dependency on Google

[j-pimp]

My guess is that one reason the senator cares is that his staff rely on Google to get their job done. It's interesting to see that throughout the federal government, workers are becoming dependent on various Google information services despite the fact that the govt. has put a lot of effort into building its own mapping services.

I see this as a good thing. Lets have massive reductions in the government mapping department. Fire some unnecessary employees and make whatever raw photos and GIS data the government collects easily available to google maps and potential competitors.

Re:I find it hard to believe anything malicious

[jabuzz]

The U.S.A. is the richest country on earth, yet the state of much of New Orleans is an absolute disgrace. Much of what happened in terms of immediate relief at the time was a total and utter shambles. The long term distribution of aid to those effected has also been little short of corrupt. It really is a shameful episode in the history of the U.S.A.

Thing is the current administration bears much of the responsibility, and I am sure they would like to have it covered up as much as possible. One way would be to pressure Google to remove the post Katrina imagery so Joe Public has no easy way to find out the extent of the damage, and the extent to which so little has been done to fix it.

Did they do it? I don't know but it is worth investigating because if they did it is a massive deal.

Re:Congress: STFU.

[beoba]

As a resident of Phoenix, your water supply is imported from California. Why should the "coastal homeowners" of California feel obligated to provide you with water? After all, its your fault that you live in a fucking desert, and you should be punished for it.

Re:Congress: STFU.

[lawpoop]

"Why should my tax dollars go to people who have chosen to live in disaster-prone areas?"

You're failing to look at the big picture. The reason is because New Orleans is one of the busiest ports in the world. All of the goods we send down the Mississippi river enter the ocean through the port of New Orleans. Of course, the port is more than just long docks and loading cranes. Part of the infrastructure of the port are the human workers who actually make the thing go. All of the people who live in New Orleans provide the human infrastructure to keep the port running. That's the reason they live there -- the port needs human laborers to keep the cargo coming in. Those human laborers need places to sleep at night, places to eat, places to buy groceries from, etc. You get the idea.

The problem with ports is that they have to be on the water. We can't build ports in the middle of Montana so that they will be safe from hurricanes. Ports, which hopefully I don't need to explain are a vital part of our infrastructure, will periodically be threatened by flooding and hurricanes. As a society, we have to band together to create massive projects such as ports so we can import our morning coffee from South America and send our DVDs to Europe. You won't personally be conscripted to work on the port itself, like in the pyramid-building days of ancient Egypt, but you will have to pitch in some money in the form of taxes. Or, we could just let our ports be destroyed, one by one, after each flood or hurricane. We don't really *need* bananas from Brazil, or rice from China. But I don't think you'll find much to eat in the middle of your desert.

As a society, we did fuck up the New Orleans situation. We had a horrifically inadequate levy system. Politicians at all levels failed to bring them up to par for decades. As a society, we didn't plan ahead to protect our infrastructure, and now we are paying for it.

I do agree that if people are taking risks, such as building million-dollar beachfront homes in California or Florida, we don't need to subsidize them through taxes. However, we do need a port on the mouth of the Mississippi, and we need to make sure that that port will be manned no matter what natural disasters threaten it.

Re:Dependency on Google

[Teun]

I don't guess but am pretty sure you missed the reason for concern in the original article.

Becoming dependent on a commercial entity for providing you with data important for the ability of your democraticaly chosen government to take decisions is extremely dangerous.

When you on occasion not like the actions of your elected officials you would take corrective action at the next election, something you can't do with a Google.

Re:As a consumer...

[ctnp]

... and it's certainly worth our tax money to have this issue in a house subcommittee - just so you can rest assured that the gub'ment has Google's consumer affairs on its docket?

Re:I find it hard to believe anything malicious

[lawpoop]

You have a valid point, but I think there will always be a need for a port on the mouth of the Mississippi river. It was the fifth largest port in the US, IIRC. That's the difference between New Orleans and beach-front resort property in Florida. We don't need the resort homes; we do need a port for the Mississippi river. That port will need workers, and those workers will need housing and grocery stores, etc. I think it's a question how far inland we re-build New Orleans. Unless we want a 3rd-world shanty-city in the US, servicing a major port. .

Re:Surprising mistake by Google

[Temporal]

By not taking the curvature of the earth into account with these directions, they have made your swim much longer than it needs to be

Indeed. Noting this, [Congressional subcommittee chair Brad] Miller was quoted as saying, "To use a straight line path across the map when greater circular paths are shorter without some explanation as to why appears to be fundamentally dishonest."

Better question

[baomike]

Why should my tax dollars go to support people?

Re:I find it hard to believe anything malicious

[DerekLyons]

One factor you are ignoring is that by using old images, they have made their maps less accurate.

One factor that you ignoring, is the 'newer' imagery wasn't particulary accurate either. They showed a city deluged by water - which it hasn't been for over a year now.
 
Niether the old *or* the new is particularly correct with regards to current conditions.

Re:As a consumer...

[knewter]

Error or otherwise, it should be resolved.

I agree with you. The part I disagree with is Congree getting involved in businesses'...business.

You have a very straightforward way to tell Google your opinion: stop using their products.

Welcome to the market. Enjoy your stay.

Re:We'll never know

[Dun Malg]

Google used to use newer (flooded) images, then went back to older (unflooded) ones. It's not that they're outdated that's strange, it's that they went backwards.

Isn't it fairly obvious? Images of land under 6 feet of water are largely useless for navigation. If the newest images they have are flood images, it stands to reason that at some point you'd want to get some images showing dry land, with streets, landmarks, etc. If all you have that shows that is pre-flood images, your only choice is to go back to the older images until the satellite images are updated.

Re:Congress: STFU.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

The port by definition will be above the waterline. How did you go from "we need the port" to "we need to build and maintain levees to protect homes built 14 feet below sea level? If that port generates that much traffic, the commerce will pay for the building and maintenance of it. They can charge toll to the barges and build the port. Leave my taxes alone. Please.

Re:I find it hard to believe anything malicious

[Dun Malg]

One factor you are ignoring is that by using old images, they have made their maps less accurate. The idea of a map is that you know where you are and what the things around you look like.

New Orleans has been dry for over a year, and you think that an image showing it under water is more accurate? The old images which actually show all the ROADS are more useful for navigation.

This is bogus

[briancnorton]

"To use older, pre-Katrina imagery when more recent images are available without some explanation as to why appears to be fundamentally dishonest

Google Earth/Maps are geospatial tools for navigation, data visualization, aggregation, etc. It is NOT a political weapon, and it is not an ELT for interpreting imagery. If you have imagery of flooded streets or debris covered areas, you DON'T USE IT for navigation. You use imagery that shows the streets and matches your vector data.

Re:We'll never know

[Curtman]

They do this in areas that are completely unrelated to Katrina as well.. This [google.ca] road now exists, and doesn't in fact go through those buildings or those fields. That construction project in that area took almost 2 years to complete and Google shows it as it was before it began. I doubt it's a conspiracy, but probably due to being a cloudy day during the last pass of the satellite.

Re:Congress: STFU.

[Kaboom13]

(I apologize this has strayed so far off topic)
I won't even comment on your racist "non-white people who survive on government assistance", it's a bullshit argument that can not be supported by any real evidence. As far as Florida relying on income from the federal government, I'd point you here [url]http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/26 6.html[/url] in 2004 Florida received $1.02 in federal spending for every $1.00 collected from it in 2004, putting it at #30, New York, California, and New Jersey are all near the bottom, below $0.80. The highest that year was New Mexico, at $2.00, so I'd say your conclusion that the coastal cities are leeching off the rest of the nation are dead wrong. I am not proposing we end government assistance, although I personally do not ask for no expect any, I merely propose we follow the adage "Charity begins at home", as in instead of the behemoth that is the Federal government collecting most of the tax money, and doling it out as political favors, the money is collected from the people of the community it will serve. If New York City wants a new bridge, they raise the money from their citizens, and build it, if California wants to do beach renovations, they collect the money from their citizens and do it. Instead of my money disappearing into a black hole that is the IRS and the Federal Government, I want to see where and how it is being spent with my own eyes, because as the person(s) paying for it, who better to judge if it is money well spent?

I don't get why you think I believe in extreme individualism, I happen to think Ayn Rand was a poor writer and a worse armchair philosopher. I am willing to accept the help of others, and I believe in our community, and out country we should help each other. But there is a difference between asking for and receiving help, and taking what you want by force.