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."

We'll never know

[timeOday]

Obviously google is going to say this is because of some little technical reason, and there's no real meaning to it. Is that true? Probably, but maybe not. We'll never know.

Dependency on Google

[DoofusOfDeath]

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 wonder what other parts of government are dependent on Google's functionality, and what would happen if Google was interrupted.

Who cares?

[Slithe]

Why exactly is this the government being so heavy-handed with Google? Do critical government/health/military services depend on Google Maps? I can't think of any decent conspiracy theory, so I am not sure about this. There are certainly better things Uncle Sam can do with his time than worry about one company's map-charting policies.

Re:Congress: STFU.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty pathetic that Wal-Mart did more to help the victims of Katrina than the US FEMA did, in the terms of cash and donated goods.

Are you crazy? Congress used something on the order of $60-$100 billion of your and my money on New Orleans. I don't think even Walmart pitched in that much. That's a lot of strippers and beer! All Walmart did was feed people and help them have supplies to live. FEMA gave away as many $2000 credit cards as you could stuff your pockets with!

Visibility of streets?

[instagib]

Perhaps they were aiming to provide better visibility of streets and buidlings, so it would be easier to find your way around.

BTW, what about date tagging for each given area (whatever size would be best, I can't guess) you see in GoogleEarth? After all, the image data gets updated continuosly, but also irregularily. It would be nice to even have a history for comparison for each area.

show land, not water

[stupefaction]

If pre-Katrina aerial photographs are an inferior representation of the Gulf Coast geography, then isn't it also true that snow-free pictures of Montana and Minnesota are inferior? In other words, if you think post-Katrina photos would be more accurate, then you should also agree that snowed-over photos of the northern states would be more accurate. Reductio ad absurdum.

Re:I find it hard to believe anything malicious

[The-Ixian]

What about this theory:

1. Google creates minor controversy over some photos
2. Google gets free advertising
3. Profit

Age old method, we have seen it over and over. Why are people surprised every time it happens again?

True, however

[Sycraft-fu]

There is something to be said for the plan of building the actual port where it is and moving the rest of the city (at least the parts below sea level) a little further away. In fact such a plan was suggested in the reconstruction. Given that everything is trashed and has to be rebuilt anyhow, it is a perfect time to fix some things like that. Well it was shot down as "racist" (not sure how that works) so no go.

While I agree that tax money is well spent rebuilding infrastructure I think it is reasonable to say that perhaps we should do what we can to move things so that this doesn't happen again. Also I don't think it is unreasonable to say that if you choose to live in an area that has floods, you should have to buy flood insurance to get coverage.

Re:uh....

[dave420]

I'm not trying to be rude, but it's Google Earth, not Google Fragbait's Nostalgic Memories of his Childhood... it's marketed as the most accurate representation of Earth as Google can muster, so having them roll-back controversial, and indeed important, geographical changes without a word of explanation is clearly not ideal...