IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/v6pmr_v1.html

The City Multiple: Comparing Geographies of Digital Visibility across Google Maps, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok

Author

Listed:
  • Shaker, Reza Ardekani
  • Uitermark, Justus

Abstract

Digital platforms have become key geospatial infrastructures through which cities are discovered, experienced, and evaluated. Whereas the extant literature has often focused on single platforms or assumed an undifferentiated platform urbanism, we know very little about how different platforms produce distinct geographies of urban visibility. To address this lacuna, we examine the spatially differentiated regimes of visibility that emerge when platforms mediate urban environments. In doing so, we distinguish between three dimensions of platforms’ geographies of digital visibility: (1) spatial inequality—how each platform distributes visibility across places; (2) spatial articulation—how platform visibilities map onto local urban geographies; and (3) spatial representation—the kinds of places and content that achieve visibility on each platform. Combining computational, geographic, and interpretive methods, we analyse how 6,682 eating and drinking establishments in Amsterdam are represented on TikTok, Instagram, Google Maps, and Facebook, and find strikingly weak correlations between their visibility on the four platforms. We find that each platform produces distinct structures of unequal visibility, with algorithmic-discovery platforms concentrating visibility more intensely than review-based systems. Neighbourhood-level analyses further show that platform-specific spatial articulations correspond to the gentrification and touristification of specific areas. Our findings contribute to the literatures on digital geography and platform urbanism by demonstrating that digital platforms generate multiple instantiations of the same city.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaker, Reza Ardekani & Uitermark, Justus, 2026. "The City Multiple: Comparing Geographies of Digital Visibility across Google Maps, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok," SocArXiv v6pmr_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:v6pmr_v1
    DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/v6pmr_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6a74acc2ac44e0aafe3c71d9/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31235/osf.io/v6pmr_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antoine Courmont, 2025. "Locked in a data imperative? French local businesses faced with Google Maps," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(13), pages 2687-2705, October.
    2. Liu Cao, 2025. "THE POLITICS OF WANGHONG CONSUMPTION: (Re)Making the Place through New Urban Aestheticisation," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 552-568, May.
    3. Monica Degen & Gillian Rose, 2024. "Conceptualising aesthetic power in the digitally-mediated city," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(11), pages 2176-2192, August.
    4. Irene Bronsvoort & Justus L Uitermark, 2022. "Seeing the street through Instagram. Digital platforms and the amplification of gentrification," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(14), pages 2857-2874, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shaker, Reza Ardekani & Uitermark, Justus, 2026. "Seeing Amsterdam through Google Maps: Uneven visibility and crowd-based mapping," SocArXiv fd97a_v2, Center for Open Science.
    2. Agnieszka Leszczynski & Jonathan Cinnamon & Suzi Asa & Lindi Jahiu, 2025. "Docklessness, aesthetic governance, and the urban ‘micromobility mess’," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(12), pages 2508-2525, September.
    3. Ekaterina Mizrokhi, 2025. "Book review: The Routledge Handbook of Architecture, Urban Space and Politics, Volume II: Ecology, Social Participation and Marginalities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(1), pages 207-210, January.
    4. Yibing Yao & Jiaming Xu & Hong Geng & Yuanzhi Zhang & Jing Qiao, 2025. "How the Internet Celebrity Economy Influences the Gentrification Trend of Historic Conservation Districts: Taking Tanhualin District in China as an Example," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-22, September.
    5. Antoine Courmont & Burcu Baykurt, 2025. "Google, a major stakeholder in local governance?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(13), pages 2571-2582, October.
    6. Sharon Zukin, 2025. "From the control room to the Googleplex: ‘Innovation needs a where’," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(13), pages 2706-2715, October.
    7. Solène Le Borgne, 2025. "Beyond binaries in the urban politics of the senses: Ambivalent sensory encounters in French medium-sized shrinking cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(8), pages 1529-1545, June.
    8. Nancy Odendaal, 2025. "Infrastructuration and spatial governance: Why Google is not just another service provider," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(13), pages 2716-2721, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:v6pmr_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://socarxiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.