This is from a CNN report today:
The attribute I like best about these is the feature that allows people to drill down into each point on the map, to get more specific information about that refugee camp or this politician, and then donate money or find ways to help. Talk about "shifting audiences." With such in-your-face altruistic opportunity, it's kind of hard to affect that narcotizing that sometimes occurs with news consumers, who feel that simply by reading the news one has participated in democracy.The maps will aid humanitarian operations as well as help inform the public about the millions who have fled their homes because of violence or hardship, according to the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, which is working with Google on the project.
"All of the things that we do for refugees in the refugee camps around the world will become more visible," U.N. Deputy High Commissioner for Refugees L. Craig Johnstone said at the launch in Geneva.
Users can download Google Earth software to see satellite images of refugee hot spots such as Darfur, Iraq and Colombia. Information provided by the U.N. refugee agency explains where the refugees have come from and what problems they face.
7 comments:
First, I didn't read in the full article that viewers would actually be given the opportunity to donate or find other ways to help, I read that it just gave a view into refugee camps that was never possible for the general public before. I guess I hope they would offer ways to help.
But in general, I think this type of view is great that for Google to offer, and even better for audiences. As Google doesn't really comply any news stories of their own, I think this is a good way to actually contribute some information on their own, even if it is not reporting. It is however, a view into a part of the world that reporters don't seem to spend much time on, at least in my experience.
I just hope that in addition to giving Google consumers a view into refugee camps, they provide some additional information on the situations in these areas, or this may encourage other news sources to take a different perspective on their reporting in these parts of the world
I agree, there needs to be some sort of information that goes along with the google maps, or links to places for people to donate money right from their computer in that same moment. Otherwise, I think it's a great idea for Google to provide maps of these places, but I don't know if its really going to educate people enough or move people to action. It's not like we haven't seen photographs of refugee camps in Chad or heard stories of the killings and rape in Darfur. Many people just don't see how it affects them so why should they do something about it. (Wow I am so pessimistic about American society!) So I applaud them for shifting audiences, but I don't know if this in-your-face approach is really going to work.
At the same time, I took a class last semester and a girl had no idea what was going on in Darfur. Said she had never heard of it and everyone was completely appalled. So maybe even if this new Google map thing can help to make people aware of the situation, in some ways, would make it successful.
Also, I find it funny that Google is partnering with the United Nations on this. The U.N. really needs to boost there image, especially after what is going on in Darfur and not recognizing it as genocide. So what a great way to do that than pair up with Google. Everyone loves Google, and loves Google maps even more.
Further, I think this would be even more successful if the U.N. or Google or maybe a Darfur campaign (come to think of it I never see to many Google or U.N. ads) come up with a national advertising campaign to get people to check the pictures out on Google maps. I've google mapped my house, but I can't say I would go on the web site every day. But if I knew about what Google and the U.N. were trying to do with these photographs, I would definately check it out.
Yay Google!
I guess the reason I’m excited about this is because it’s a visual confirmation of all the stuff we hear about around the world. And some people need that – I know I do sometimes. You can read all you want about the horrible conditions in Africa but it’s the point when you actually see it that it becomes real. Even those infomercials about sponsoring a child for pennies a day seem to only pull at your heart strings to pull at your purse strings (ha, I made a funnie). If audiences have control over what they see – if they can directly zoom into areas on these Google maps – it will make it seem like their own little telescope and no one is forcing them to look but themselves.
The fact that it’s the United Nations & Google also adds tons of credibility. I believe that people, for the most part, trust these two organizations. I think the only problem will be getting the word out about this awesome new tool and, of course, getting people to care about it.
I agree with all the people that have responded in that google's ideas are very good for educating people and putting the images on google earth will help to give the audience a visual image and create a stronger connection on the issue with the audience. I do think that there need to be a way to give money or a way to find help immediately, or else people will simply look at the map and continue on with their day. Although I think this is a great idea for education people about what is going on, I am kind of skeptical that it will force people to actually take action for social movements. Maybe by educating people about what is going on in Darfur and making them see the map for example will force people to take action, but I am still not sure how successful it will be. I agree with Shira in that I do not think many people really use google earth very much (I know I have only used it also to google my house) so I think that they need to find strategies to target people to go to the website and look at what is going on around the world. It is important to note the difference in news using google earth to show a visual image of what is going on around the world since pictures are not always available for every new story. I believe that this asset may force people to be educated on issues but I am not sure how much it ill force people to actually take action on social movements.
I guess I would agree that this is a good thing. I am skeptical that it will actually work (get people to become familiar with refugee camps and donate money) because often people are reluctant to donate even after they have seen visual images of starving children (like the commericals Jo was talking about).
But, beyond a pessimistic view of human nature and into more of a pessimistic view of the media (sorry), I think that what Google and the UN are doing is furthering the Victim Myth that Lule talks about. I am unsure about whether this is a bad thing or a good thing because on one hand these people ARE victims and by portraying them as such in the media could persuade people to donate. On the other hand, it could just derive pity but no real action.
My recommendation is something along the lines of what Shira suggested - that Google and the UN team up and start an ad campaign. It could be something similar to the RED campaign that Gap did, but less about buying something that then donates some money and more about just donating money. With a good campaign, I think this Google map idea could take off and become "popular" like the RED campaign. People would donate because its the cool thing AND they're helping people. I think that the media has the advantage of creating messages that can potentially become popular if the right people grab onto them.
Also just one more thing I just thought of.. to help generate donations and make it start to become "popular", Google could donate some amount of money for every hit on the Google map site. What a grand idea.
I am reading this following the discussion/debate we had in class to about publishing graphic images on the Web...
Like many people have commented, the live images of the devastation in Darfur or base camps in the Middle East are providing readers a greater understanding of what is going on in these places, because they can see the land destroyed by war and the people who are homeless as a result of it.
I think it will be interesting in the months to follow the launch to see how people will respond. It is impossible to make everyone happy and I assume there will be some negative feedback about the images presented. How will they censor this?
Post a Comment