Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Cyclists report a disproportionate number of errors to Google Maps

Google relies on user-submitted complaints to continually improve its maps. If the turn-by-turn directions tell you to turn left at an intersection where lefts are forbidden, for instance, you can report the problem, and engineers at Google’s Project Ground Truth will adjust their data accordingly.

In this new video (above), the Wall Street Journal’s Christopher Mims dug up an interesting fact about this system: cyclists contribute disproportionately more complaints than anyone else. Google hasn’t released hard data, but told Mims that cyclists are “fanatical” contributors to the system.

Mims suggests two main reasons why this might be. One is that cyclists use both roads and trails — so, in theory, they’re able to notice a broader range of Google Maps errors. Additionally, he points out that a mapping error that puts a cyclist on an especially busy road endangers their safety in a way that it doesn’t for a driver, making them much more likely to report the error.

google maps bikes

Google Maps' bicycling directions, in Manhattan. (Google)

These explanations both make a lot of sense. But I think there are a few additional factors involved:

1) Google’s biking directions are great — but they’re notoriously unreliable. They’re much newer than the driving directions, and Google simply doesn’t have as much data to go off when determining what’s a realistic bike route and what isn’t. Thus, more errors to point out.

2) Cyclists don’t just experience more danger than drivers when directions are wrong — they expend more effort. And an error that requires you to ride a lot farther (say, a map that makes it seem possible to ride from a bike path to a road, when in fact they don’t connect) would make you much more likely to report an error than one that makes you drive an extra few minutes in a car.

3) Someone on a bike has more opportunities to immediately report an error (before they forget) than someone in a car. After being thwarted by bad directions, for instance, a cyclist can report it while resting by the side of a bike trail or road. A driver, on the other hand, typically has to immediately merge back into traffic or decide where to turn next.

Read more: How Google Builds Its Maps — and What It Means for the Future of Everything

Future Perfect
The biggest drawback of driverless carsThe biggest drawback of driverless cars
Future Perfect

Driverless cars could save thousands of lives. They might also break our cities.

By Marina Bolotnikova
The Case for Growth
How America made it impossible to buildHow America made it impossible to build
Podcast
The Case for Growth

A system built to stop government from doing harm stopped it from doing anything.

By Sean Illing
Future Perfect
Is NYC’s controversial $9 toll working? The data is in.Is NYC’s controversial $9 toll working? The data is in.
Future Perfect

New York City’s congestion pricing experiment, explained in one chart.

By Pratik Pawar
Podcasts
What the government shutdown means for air travelWhat the government shutdown means for air travel
Podcast
Podcasts

“I literally can’t think of anything that’s been like that since 2001.”

By Hady Mawajdeh and Noel King
Future Perfect
A self-driving car traffic jam is coming for US citiesA self-driving car traffic jam is coming for US cities
Future Perfect

A century ago, cars remade America. Autonomous vehicles could do it again.

By David Zipper
Explain It to Me
The curse of America’s high-speed railThe curse of America’s high-speed rail
Podcast
Explain It to Me

Other countries have reliable trains that travel as fast as 200 mph. In the US...not so much.

By Jonquilyn Hill