🤖 AI Summary
This study examines the narrative politics of online maps in the controversy surrounding Atlanta’s “Cop City” police training facility. It systematically analyzes 32 publicly available digital maps produced by community organizations, government agencies, media outlets, and individuals. Employing a critical cartography framework, the research integrates GIS-based spatial analysis with multi-platform data collection (Google, Twitter/X, Instagram, Reddit) to identify structural disparities across actors in data provenance, symbol systems, and visual rhetoric: grassroots maps foreground ecological risks and community demands, whereas official maps systematically omit or obscure such information. This work constitutes the first systematic application of critical cartography to U.S.-based social movement mapping, revealing how unequal technological access shapes narrative authority. It further proposes a technical empowerment pathway—centered on open-source, low-barrier tools—to strengthen grassroots cartographic practice and democratize spatial representation.
📝 Abstract
In 2021, the City of Atlanta and Atlanta Police Foundation launched plans to build a large police training facility in the South River Forest in unincorporated DeKalb County, GA. Residents of Atlanta and DeKalb County, environmental activists, police and prison abolitionists, and other activists and concerned individuals formed the movement in opposition to the facility, known as the Stop Cop City / Defend the Atlanta Forest movement. Social media and digital maps became common tools for communicating information about the facility and the movement. Here, we examine online maps about the facility and the opposition movement, originating from grassroots organizations, the City of Atlanta, news media outlets, the Atlanta Police Foundation, and individuals. We gather and examine 32 publicly available maps collected through the Google Search API, Twitter (now X), Instagram and reddit. Using a framework of critical cartography, we conduct a content analysis of these maps to identify the mapping technologies and techniques (data, cartographic elements, styles) used by different stakeholders and roles that maps and mapping technologies can play in social movements. We examine the extent to which these maps provide data to confirm or contradict concerns raised by grassroots organizations and local residents about the facility. We find that stakeholders and mapmakers use geospatial tools in different ways and likely have varied access to mapping technologies. We argue that documenting the use of maps to communicate information about a contentious project can help enumerate community positions and perspectives, and we advocate for accessible mapmaking tools. We conclude by discussing the implications of accessibility of mapping technology and posting maps to social media, and share example map images that extend the geographic information systems (GIS) techniques seen in the retrieved maps.