Toronto resident Abe Train created Globle, a geography themed game inspired by the hit Wordle, out of boredom. But after its launch, he realized the placement of certain borders was controversial, raising larger concerns about internet map data and national sovereignty.
When Abe Train created Globle, a game that tasks players with guessing a mystery country every day, he had no reason to expect controversy.
Train used open-source map data from Github, a well-known hosting service, but didn’t give the drawing of borders much thought until the game became more popular.
Fans objected to some aspects, such as the exclusion of Singapore and showing the Crimean peninsula of Ukraine belonging to Russia, whose military is currently occupying the area. (One Israel blogger in particular was quite angry about Palestine being featured on the map.)
Feeling the pressure from these fans, Train has made updates to his game. But it’s not without anxiety.
In an interview with Matt Pearce of the Los Angeles Times, Train explains his nerves surrounding the issue. “I’m just changing some international borders, no big deal.” He goes on to describe the issues surrounding disputed territories as “[not] really solvable.” Especially for someone in his shoes.
But a simple independent app developer isn’t the only one who faces these questions of global sovereignty.
“I’m just changing some international borders, no big deal,” Abe Train, creator of Globle.
National Geographic’s official map policy states that the company “strives to be apolitical” and “does not purport to be the sole determiner of the status of a boundary, area, or place-name.” But a company who’s made universally accessible maps its job has a much harder time staying apolitical.
In 2014, Google Maps ran into trouble over the issue of Crimea.
After Russia invaded the area, three versions of the map were made. Ukraine saw the land as belonging to Ukraine, the Russian internet showed it as part of Russia. The rest of the world was given a dashed line indicating the border is disputed.
In an interview with the Washington Post in 2020, director of product management for Google Maps, Ethan Russell said, “We remain neutral on issues of disputed regions and borders, and make every effort to objectively display the dispute in our maps using a dashed gray border line. In countries where we have local versions of Google Maps, we follow local legislation when displaying names and borders.”
Source: Washington Post
But authoritarian countries tend to insist upon their own very subjective version of reality.
As far back as 2005, Google gave into pressure from Mainland China to classify Taiwan as a province of China. It wasn’t until the Taiwan Solidarity Union complained that Google walked it back, which surely contributed to the company’s ban from China.
When a Western company like Google makes designations on its maps, it wields a lot of power. The company’s supposed policy of “Don’t be evil” is a lofty goal, but easily abandoned by shifting concerns or leadership. What’s to stop them from adopting Abe Train’s “no big deal” attitude toward the changing of international borders? If China offers a foothold into its economy in exchange for certain permanent changes, would Google be able to resist?
Most importantly, is it even possible to “objectively display” the world while also giving in to local governmental pressure?
That something simple like Globle could open the door to these concerns shows just how complicated digital border designations are. Abe Train had no agenda but to create a fun experience, but other entities that have the power to draw these lines surely do. When companies offer different and conflicting versions of reality, who exactly decides what is real?
