iTWire - Google Street View: Is privacy only for the rich?

Stephen Withers turns his gaze on the world of Apple, with detours into other aspects of IT and communications as they catch his attention.

Google Street View: Is privacy only for the rich?

by Stephen Withers
Thursday, 07 August 2008
Page 1 of 3 ! Investigation of the coverage of Google Street View of upmarket parts of Melbourne seem to show that the some of the more swanky areas have not been photographed. Is this because the rich get the privilege of privacy or mere coincidence? When I wrote about Street View yesterday I discounted the idea that "one law for the rich and another for the rest of us" applied. But further exploration made me wonder if that was the case after all. Looking at Street View's coverage of Melbourne, there are various gaps that seem to coincide with areas of high property values. One covers the upmarket parts of Caulfield where houses cost between $2 million and $4 million, extending south into East Brighton. Another example can be found in Toorak. That's a very upmarket suburb, but I'm told by someone that follows real estate much more closely than I do that the unphotographed St Georges Road area is especially blue chip. On the other hand, Monomeath Avenue, Canterbury - generally regarded as one of Melbourne's most prestigious streets - is covered by Street View. A house there sold for nearly $9 million a few months ago. Other holes in Street View coverage include a large chunk of Hawthorn East, another upmarket area. But other swanky as well as not so prestigious addresses are also affected, as you'll see on page 2. << First page < 1 2 3 Next page > Last page - Post your comment >>

< Next story in category		Previous story in the category >