The practice of using TikTok and Google Earth for virtual exploration, as seen in Natasha Gupta’s content, offers a novel approach to geographic engagement, particularly for younger audiences. The format taps into the aesthetics of social media, making geography visually appealing and relatable. However, it risks reducing the complexity of geography to superficial observations. In the process, geographic landscapes are reduced to binary judgments—”ugly” or “not ugly”—which may perpetuate a shallow understanding of place. This simplified perspective overlooks the deeper, often invisible, forces that shape our physical and human environments, including history, culture, politics, and economics.

For The GIEI, Gupta’s method poses both an opportunity and a challenge. On the positive side, her videos have sparked interest in geography by making it accessible and fun, opening up conversations about regions that may not receive much attention otherwise. By bringing millions of viewers into contact with places as varied as France, the Philippines, and Ohio, these explorations counteract cultural biases that often paint certain locations as undesirable or unworthy of study.

Yet, from a critical geographical perspective, the main drawback is the oversimplification of places into a visual binary, void of context. While aesthetic judgments are natural human reactions, reducing geography to what’s pleasing to the eye overlooks the multi-dimensional character of place. Geographers understand that landscapes are not just shaped by natural beauty but also by human intervention, history, economic forces, and the lived experiences of people. A “bland” roadside hotel, for instance, might tell a fascinating story about globalization, tourism, or urban sprawl that a quick, dismissive glance cannot capture.

Moreover, this TikTok practice relies on first impressions and instinctual reactions, which could reinforce stereotypes or misconceptions. For example, classifying an area based on weather conditions or architectural style risks perpetuating narrow views of regions, potentially overlooking the broader geographic significance of those areas. For geography educators, this raises important questions about the responsibility of digital content creators in shaping public perceptions of the world.

A more enriched version of this method, aligned with the goals of critical geography, would encourage viewers to dig deeper. Instead of focusing solely on visual aesthetics, users could explore questions like: What economic activities shape this landscape? What is the cultural or political significance of the place? How do migration patterns or historical events impact this environment? By incorporating these dimensions, the practice could become a powerful educational tool that fosters a more nuanced understanding of the world, even at its “ugliest.”

While Gupta’s TikTok practice of exploring the world via Google Earth provides an engaging starting point for geographic inquiry, it has limitations in fostering critical geographic thinking. The challenge lies in harnessing the popularity of such trends to encourage deeper engagement with geography—moving beyond surface-level judgments and towards a more comprehensive understanding of the spatial processes that shape our world.

For a lesson that engages with more critical ways of using Google Earth and TikTok, check out this idea on Asking the World.