Details of over 10,000 members of the UK
British National Party appeared in the public domain after a former member supposedly leaked the list online. Links to the data were made highly visible on sites such as Digg.com.
Then a Google map mash-up was created - zoom in to find the BNP member in your street!
The Guardian decided against embedding or linking to the map and instead used this still image (left) to illustrate their coverage.
Techcrunch did carry the map, much to the
disapproval of some.
Ben Charlton (spod.cx), who created the map that appeared on TechCrunch, has now removed the Google map from his site and replaced it instead with a heat map (left) saying that,
I have decided to take down the map. Many people have commented that the map does give a false impression of accuracy, despite my making this clear, and I'm tempted to agree. I do not want to single anybody out and by removing the accuracy from the map it is possible that it ends up incorrectly implying a property contains a BNP member. It has been suggested that an inaccurate map that doesn't make that clear is worse than publishing the list itself, and I think that's a reasonable comment
So what does all of this mean?
Well let's forget about this particular data set, your view on the BNP and their place in the UK democratic process is not relevant.
What is relevant, and important, is the eagerness in this digital age with which a dataset that happens to contain location information is so readily displayed on a map.
The developments by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, OpenStreetMap (and the rest) have opened up some fantastic opportunities for displaying content with improved geographical context and given us the tools to make huge or complex data sets much more accessible and viewable.
But if you make something more accessible then more people will access it, or at least that is the aim, and people generally believe what they see.
It should be obvious, but if you put a pin on a map - make sure the pin is in the right place!
Are you pointing at a person? Or a house? How sure are you that the pin is in the right place? You have to be pretty damn precise to get each individual building correct.
If you are pointing at a postcode area, a district, even a street, then do you have the correct marker device?
So much of our data is not at the level of accuracy whereby you could literally stand on the spot marked 'x' but, largely due to the way these tools currently work, we still use pins to suggest a level of precision and accuracy that might not be there.
Maptube is one example of a tool that is looking at better ways of displaying this data, although by allowing full use of the navigation tools on applications such as Google Maps users may still derive an inaccurate message.
For example, is it really fair to assume that the people living
in houses on the right are not affected by the Greater Manchester Congestion Charge proposal whereas
those on the left would work or shop elsewhere if the charge was introduced? Zoom right in and even next-door neighbours appear to have a very different view.
The problems are varied and the solutions not always straightforward but I suggest remembering a couple of simple points would be very useful.
- Always, always ask yourself, does this content really need to be on a map? Does the map provide something that other methods for viewing the data don't?
- Are you using the right mapping tool, the best visual markers? There are so many geo-related applications available on the web right now, so why is it still always a Google Map mashup?
- Are the markers/points/lines in the right place? Even when you zoom in to high levels of detail? Is there anything potentially misleading about the visual representation? Do you need any supplementary text explaining the map?
- And finally, to be sure, does this content really need to be on map?
Labels: content, mapping
Links
