Discussing Google's criteria for publishing Updates: A Case Study

Google Maps contribution stories
1

Two screenshots of updates from the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao. On the left, an unpublished update from Local Guide Francesc Domingo featuring a detailed photo of a ceramic figurine display in the museum's shop, accompanied by informative text. On the right, a published update from a Level 10 Local Guide, showing a less informative photo of the museum's ceiling, without any accompanying text. Interestingly, this latter update has been published twice despite its lack of information.
Two screenshots of updates from the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao. On the left, an unpublished update from Local Guide Francesc Domingo featuring a detailed photo of a ceramic figurine display in the museum's shop, accompanied by informative text. On the right, a published update from a Level 10 Local Guide, showing a less informative photo of the museum's ceiling, without any accompanying text. Interestingly, this latter update has been published twice despite its lack of information.2160×3272 487 KB

Hello fellow Local Guides and moderators,

I am writing to discuss an issue that I recently encountered with an update I made on Google Maps. As a Local Guide, I strive to provide valuable and detailed information to other users. However, I have noticed that some of my updates, which I believe are informative and of good quality, are not being published.

Recently, I visited the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao and made an update featuring a photo of a ceramic figurine display in the museum’s shop. The figurines, designed by Belgian artist Guido Deleu and handcrafted in the Cores da Terra studio in Brazil, were a find that I wanted to share with other users. I accompanied the photo with the following comment: “‘The Visitor’, ceramic figurine at the Guggenheim Museum shop. Bilbao, Basque Country. June 28, 2023.” However, this update was not published.

On the other hand, I noticed that another Local Guide, who is at level 10, had two identical updates published. These updates featured a photo of the museum’s ceiling and did not include any comments. While I respect the contributions of all Local Guides, I found it puzzling that these updates, which I believe do not provide much information or value to users, were published twice, while my informative update was not.

This experience has led me to question Google’s criteria for selecting updates to publish. It seems to me that the current system may favor quantity over quality, and this is a concern I have raised in previous forum posts regarding the points system in Google Maps. I believe that this system can negatively impact the quality of content on Google Maps, as it may encourage users to post more updates for the sake of earning points, rather than focusing on providing valuable information.

I have attached screenshots of my unpublished update and the published updates for reference.

As a person interested in the quality of publications, I would like to open a discussion on this topic. What are your thoughts on Google’s criteria for publishing updates? Do you believe that the current system encourages quantity over quality? How can we, as Local Guides, work towards improving the quality of updates on Google Maps?

I look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspectives.

Thank you for your time.

6 Likes
2

Thanks for starting this conversation, @FrancescDomingo .

About the same subject you can read Choosing to add photos under Photos vs Updates??? , a post started by @Rednewt74 a month ago.

According to Post photo updates of a place "On your mobile device, you can post photo updates of a place. These updates are visual posts that you contribute to so that you can share updates about a place, like:

  • Changes to business hours
  • Seasonal menus
  • New products or services
  • Renovations
  • Exhibits
  • COVID-19 updates

For places that have multiple photo updates, the most recent update shows up first."

According to the store of the Museum the product in your photo is “in store” and it doesn’t seems to be a new product.

According to the website of one of the seller "The Visitor was created by Guido Deleu in 1996, as part of a contest to design a sculpture for the main entrance of a cultural center in Flanders, Belgium" and it is on sale in several places.

So, according to the indication mentioned above your photo is not an update, and the date mentioned by you seems to be just the date of your post. You should post it on the photo section, or attaching it on your review.

The other photo shared by you should be reported, because it is not an update and it is also useless, for what I can see in your screenshot.

Honestly, looking at the other “updates by visitors” of the museum I think all of them should be removed, because none of them is really an update

2 Likes
3

Thank you for your response, @ErmesT

I completely agree with your points. However, if we apply your reasoning to the case at hand, we could argue that the ceiling of the museum is even older than the figurines in the shop, making it even less of an update, yet it was published.

I am attaching the latest updates of repetitive photos with no information. I believe that my photo provided more value to Maps users than all of these published updates.

I appreciate your perspective on this matter and look forward to continuing this discussion.

Repetitive photos that do not provide relevant information in the updates of the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.
Repetitive photos that do not provide relevant information in the updates of the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.1080×3472 440 KB
Repetitive photos that do not provide relevant information in the updates of the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.
Repetitive photos that do not provide relevant information in the updates of the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.2308×1080 202 KB

4

As I said, @FrancescDomingo , “I think all of them should be removed, because none of them is really an update”.

But I like the fact that you opened this conversation, because it doesn’t makes any sense to have the “Updated” section as a simple additional space for adding photos. The updated section was correctly opened to the Local Guides during the pandemic, to give us the possibility to update the information about the businesses, including the ones that were not claimed. However, in the actual situation and with the misuse of the feature bu the Local Guides I think that possibility should be removed.

1 Like
5

@ErmesT ,

Thank you for the mention. I am still rarely posting under updates. Unless you’re going back to a POI, like you suggested a new Exhibition at a museum, I don’t see how you can really call your photo an update. Or if you’ve heard about major changes at a place and go to document them, but I think I would still put some under the regular Gallery as well as the update category.

I wonder how many viewers actually go to the update tab?

1 Like
6

Thank you for your reply, @ErmesT .

I appreciate your perspective and agree that the “Updates” section should not be used as an additional space for adding photos. However, the Google Maps app does suggest “Show others what the place looks like now” when adding updates, which implies a chronological display of the place, and this isn’t bad.

But let’s put aside the discussion of whether my photo is an update or not. The fact is, all these repetitive, irrelevant photos, selfies, and photos of other places have been published in just the last few hours. Yet my photo, which is of the museum, accompanied by an explanation, not a selfie, not duplicated, and of acceptable quality, has not been published. This leads me to wonder if the problem lies with me? This is really bothering me and I don’t feel like wasting time discussing the quality of Google Maps.

I returned from my vacation in the Basque Country over a week ago. I have videos, photos, and 360s from various places, and reviews to write. Yet, I have not written any reviews. I’ve only uploaded a few 360s, some videos, and a few photos, and some updates. No reviews, even though I was paid by those who sponsored my vacation to write reviews about their businesses (this is meant to be ironic).

The world will keep turning without my concerns for writing good reviews and thoroughly documenting places in an attempt to achieve overall higher quality.

It seems that Google Maps is evolving in its own unique way, perhaps not in the direction that some of us, as responsible Local Guides (which is how I personally consider myself), might hope for. But that’s okay. The platform, which is a business, continues to function and serve its purpose. After all, the world of Google Maps doesn’t revolve around us Local Guides and our contributions. In the end, we are their customers.

1 Like
7

Screenshot of an update made by Local Guide Francesc Domingo featuring a video of the Biscaia Bridge with a brief description. An arrow highlights the text 'Show others what the place looks like now'.
Screenshot of an update made by Local Guide Francesc Domingo featuring a video of the Biscaia Bridge with a brief description. An arrow highlights the text 'Show others what the place looks like now'.1080×2400 218 KB

Dear @ErmesT

I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to share with you a recent update I made on the Biscaia Bridge’s page. I’ve uploaded a video providing a current view of the place.

In the attached screenshot, you can see the update with a brief description. The arrow in the image points to the text “Show others what the place looks like now”, which I believe is the purpose of these updates - to chronologically show how a place looks and evolves, always provided that the photos or videos uploaded offer a quality perspective.

The update seems to have been published without any issues, which is great news. You can view the update directly through this link: https://goo.gl/maps/hoWtDSt9PyM5wdgXA

Thank you for your attention and for the valuable work you do in this community.

Best regards,

Francesc Domingo

1 Like