Google Maps and the Continued Expansion

I could never imagine trying to drive to an unfamiliar location without Google Maps. Everywhere I go, I am continually dependent on the sheet of paper I printed out with turn by turn directions. If I feel I'm a little lost while on the road, I use my smartphone to help me out. Listening to parents and older adults talk about how they used actual maps seems like rocket science to me. Indeed, this new technology assists drivers tremendously in addition to GPS devices. With other applications available, why is Google the default service that the majority of consumers use? As explained in Siva Vaidhynathan's book Googlization of Everything, specifically the chapter entitled "Googlization of Us," internet users are becoming more and more dependent on Google. Whether or not this is a positive step for society culturally and morally, Google is simply the best and most comprehensive product to use. Personal experiences with Yahoo! maps and MapQuest have not been positive and the preference for Google showcases that other consumers share my sentiment. The new maps application for the iPhone 5 has been under heavy scrutiny for leading drivers in the wrong direction and for not including some streets that do exist. Regardless of the larger issue at hand, the better product always win. The better product is Google.

Google Maps and its Street View has set the bar extremely high for navigation applications. In this recent eWeek article, Google Maps and Street View are expanding even further. Pictures of the Grand Canyon will be included and Google Maps will include information about the terrain and vegetation of the land. The goal Google is trying to accomplish with all this new information is to present an accurate and easy to understand picture of the entire world right to the consumers' fingertips. MapQuest, Yahoo!, and Apple are no where close to achieving this type of product. The fact that those competitors struggle with giving accurate and up-to-date directions showcases what a difficult concept navigation can be. With construction, weather conditions, and traffic information all contributing factors, there is never one way to get to a destination. The amount of options available to the consumer and that the application should present is quite perplexing. The article also describes that Street View is looking to have 150 college campuses on file within the next year. Not only will this serve as a good tool to compare and contrast how different campuses look, it may eliminate college visits all together and totally change the game when it comes to college admissions. Endless possibilities are presented as Google continues its expansion.

Vaidhynathan presents an argument that today's internet user will not have a broad scope of the world because it will only trust what Google presents to them. While many cultural and moral issues arise from this "internet monopoly," Google has the best product. Attempts such as the Bing vs. Google challenge will need to increase if consumers are expected use any other type of internet platform. We see the same in the smartphone business as Samsung and Motorola want customers to know that the Apple iPhone is not the only smartphone on the market. Consumers will always gravitate towards the better product. As bad as it may sound, issues such as dependency and limited perspective are not the forefront of concerns for a typical internet user. The consequences of "Googlization" are unknown and so are the long-term effects. As of right now, my choice for searching content and directions would be Google because the consumer always wants to use the best.

The Cost of Technology's Covenience

In Simson Garfinkel's article, "Privacy and the New Technology: What They Do Know Can Hurt You," the author goes through several realistic scenarios in which privacy is invaded by technology. Whether its using a credit card or allowing a smartphone application to view your location, it is possible to know what someone did all day without even having to ask them. GPS devices make it possible to keep track of a person and know exactly where they are. Garfinkel also elaborates on the cost of this convenient technology. He addresses this by stating "If we want the convenience of paying for a meal by credit card or paying for a toll with an electronic tag mounted on your review mirror, then we must accept the routine collections of our purchases and driving habits in a large database over which we have no control" (324). Basically, by giving all our personal information to these companies, there is no way of knowing where this information will end up. Spam emails and telemarketing phone calls are the usual result as these corporations try to reach out to customers. Garfinkel does not approve of this, claiming "This trade-off is both unnecessary and wrong" (324).

I disagree with Garfinkel's opinion. In a society and business world that is driven by convenience, customers are proving they are willing to pay a little more or give away their information for faster and improved service. People want their food delivered to them, so naturally one will pay a "delivery fee" for the convenience of not having to leave their home and receive their food at their door step. Using a credit card is a convenience as well. It allows a customer to receive goods or services without withdrawing cash from the bank and the ability to pay at a later date. An example of this convenience is that drugstores are now entering the grocery game. As explained in this ABC News article, drugstores such as Walgreens and CVS are now carrying produce and more food items in order to compete with grocery stores. This convenience does indeed come with a price though. In this MSN Money article, prices of various items are compared between several stores. While it explains that CVS had a much lower price than Walgreens for one particular food item, the cereal, it is important to note that you need to be signed up for the CVS rewards program to obtain that price. In exchange for that reduced price, the customer is giving CVS their personal information and allowing them to track what items they are purchasing.

While Garfinkel's claim is a nice little statement defending privacy, it is difficult to understand how these conveniences will be served without this trade-off. The information that these companies are obtaining from this data collecting is crucial to their success. They are receiving great feedback and data showing where their strengths and weaknesses are; what their customers like and don't like. The survey fast food restaurants encourage you to take and in return you receive a free item is not a fair trade. The company is receiving this important feedback in exchange for one free item. That's a rip off for the customer! Companies should be paying more for this insight and data collection. Allowing companies to track our purchasing history in exchange for better prices for us is a great deal. Companies should be giving away much more than discounts and coupons for access into our likes and dislikes. This is where Garfinkel misses the point. Customers should take advantage of this and demand more than just a free cookie or 10% off their next purchase for this information.

Recognizing Illegal Websites

As the internet becomes more accessible to people around the world, the opportunities for networking become greater. Users share scholarly articles and YouTube videos with one another instantly. It is no longer necessary to physically "show" a friend a video. All that is needed is to email them or post a link on their Facebook or MySpace page. In addition to sharing, users can download content and store it on their personal hard drive, allowing them to watch it anytime and as many times as they want. Some of the content is expensive so naturally the advanced technology has created some loop-holes that allow some people to obtain this content for free. Illegal music downloading sites and movie viewing sites are appearing to eliminate the sales of DVDs and CDs. Lawrence Lessig notes in his book Remix that "Most in the industry— at least circa 2002— believed that 'piracy' was unavoidable given the 'nature' of digital technologies. Most thus believed the industry faced a choice: drive digital to the periphery and save the industry, or allow it to become mainstream, and watch the industry fail" (40). While Lessig states that Steve Jobs' innovations have saved the industry, these illegal musical downloading websites still receive millions of users a day.

While the ruling on whether or not some of these music websites are legal or not is extremely fuzzy and grey, they are becoming a widely acknowledged tool in the marketing industry. There are a lot of advertisements on these websites because, obviously, so many people access the site everyday. Advertising on these websites definitely comes with risks. According to this recent article, big companies Samsung and Coca-Cola removed their advertisements from a popular music piracy website based in Vietnam. This website, called Zing, has had many multinational companies advertise on their website. The article analyzes the situation by stating that these big corporations' advertisements have added legitimacy to the website and this has upset the artists who feel money is being taken away from them. After Coca-Cola and Samsung were notified of this sentiment, they removed their ads stating they want to respect and support the artists.

While their publicly released statements sound nice, this is obviously a move by these companies to save their reputation. Even though there are millions of users on this website, big companies probably do not want to be associated with websites like Zing. Even though this may be a business savvy move, Lessig's observation about the industry's opinion in 2002 that this may have to just be an accepted way of technology (music sharing) comes full circle. For big businesses like Coca-Cola and Samsung, they are already very established and have enough exposure as it is. For smaller companies looking to thrive in this economy, advertisements on websites like Zing may be the right way to go. The exposure is great and it is showing an acknowledgement that no matter what the laws may be, this technology is becoming the new norm. Lawsuits seem to be either pending or in the process in all of these matters and it is difficult to know what exactly is illegal. The safest thing is to buy CDs or use iTunes. However, as Lessig notes, the culture is always changing and transforming and these new sharing opportunities significantly increase the ways users can obtain many forms of content.