Digital Cartographies of Power: The Gulf of America Renamed and Digital Coloniality
Introduction
Our understanding and navigation of geographical space have been profoundly altered by the digital revolution, which has also given rise to new power dynamics that both reflect and expand on past colonial dominance patterns. The deep connections between internet infrastructure, geopolitics, and what academics increasingly acknowledge as digital coloniality were made clear when President Donald Trump signed an executive order in January 2025 renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the "Gulf of America," and Google Maps later adopted this change for users in the United States while keeping the original name for users in other countries.
This essay examines how this seemingly technical geographical choice reveals more general trends of digital power, examining how digital platforms have emerged as crucial locations for the modern exercise and debate of global power.
Theoretical Structure: Internet Geographies and Digital Coloniality
Digital coloniality, which is defined by the concentration of digital infrastructure, data extraction, and algorithmic control in the hands of primarily Western corporations and states, is a continuation of historical colonial relations through technological means. In order to understand how digital technologies perpetuate hierarchical ties between the Global North and South, this idea expands on decolonial theory. It does this by establishing new kinds of reliance and dominance that function through code, data, and connectivity instead of direct political control.
Early internet theorists previously envisioned deterritorialized utopias, but as Graham's (2014) seminal work on internet geographies shows, digital environments are far from that. Rather, the internet is intricately linked to material geographies of power, and its content, infrastructure, and access patterns all reflect and reinforce current global disparities. With major centers for connectivity, data storage, and platform control centered in affluent areas, especially Silicon Valley and other tech hubs in the Global North, the architecture of the internet is geographically centrally located.
Digital platforms actively create geographical reality by deciding which locations, viewpoints, and knowledge systems become visible or invisible in digital space.
— Ballatore, Graham, and Sen (2017)
The study of "digital hegemonies" by Ballatore, Graham, and Sen (2017) offers important new perspectives on the subtle but significant ways that mapping apps and search engines exert cultural and political power. Digital platforms actively create geographical reality by deciding which locations, viewpoints, and knowledge systems become visible or invisible in digital space, as evidenced by their examination of localized search results. What they refer to as "digital hegemonies" are systems in which platform design decisions turn become tools of cultural and political domination as a result of this algorithmic mediation of geographic information.
Case Study: The Gulf of America Rename
The renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the "Gulf of America" is a prime illustration of how internet platforms have evolved into essential tools for geopolitics and asserting foreign policy. The Gulf of Mexico will now formally be recognized as the Gulf of America, according to an executive order signed by President Trump on January 20, 2025. The directive positioned cartographic control as a tool of national assertion by mandating that this name be reflected in all federal government maps and documents.
Google's response shed light on the intricate geopolitics of digital/online mapping. Noting that it has "a longstanding practice of applying name changes when they have been updated in official government sources," the company declared that it would adopt the name change for users in the United States while keeping "Gulf of Mexico" for users in Mexico and other nations. When using Google Maps, Mexican users continued to see "Gulf of Mexico" until February 2025, but U.S. users started seeing "Gulf of America".
Key Implications of Localized Implementation
This localized implementation highlights several important aspects of digital colonialism. In the first place, it shows how internet platforms have developed into important geopolitical dispute arbitrators, making technological decisions that have significant political ramifications. Multiple digital realities are successfully created by Google's decision to employ geographically varied names, allowing users in various nations to inhabit separate map universes.
The increasing prevalence of "disputed names" in digital mapping, where platforms have to balance conflicting territorial claims and political sensitivities, is reflected in this fragmentation of digital geography. This case demonstrates that digital platforms are not mere mirrors of geographical reality but active constructors of it, with the power to determine which names, places, and territorial understandings become visible or invisible to different user communities.
The Power of Maps, Cartography and Digital Hegemony
According to Ballatore et al. (2017), the Gulf of America case serves as an example of how digital hegemony operates. The authors contend that the seemingly neutral technical procedures of indexing, sorting, and displaying information are how search engines and mapping platforms wield dominant authority rather than through direct coercion. Google's decision to adhere to U.S. government regulations while maintaining distinct names for various national audiences in the Gulf renaming seems more like a technical solution than a political one, yet it has a significant impact on how millions of people perceive geographic reality.
Graham (2014) defines the material infrastructure of the internet as the means by which this cartographic power functions. Differential naming is a feature of Google Maps that demonstrates the company's control over vital digital infrastructure, including the servers, algorithms, and data systems that mediate geographic knowledge for billions of users globally. Google's mapping data is processed in data centers mostly in the United States and other wealthy nations, demonstrating how heavily concentrated this infrastructure is in the Global North.
Evidence of Uneven Power Distribution
When you look at which nations Google allows for naming preferences, you can see how uneven this power is. Although the platform carried out the United States' name of the Gulf, it has shown greater resistance to demands of a similar nature from nations in the Global South. The imperial characteristics of digital platforms, where technical choices continuously prioritize the interests of powerful states and corporations above those of oppressed nations and communities, are reflected in this decision.
Geopolitical Control and Digital Infrastructure
The renaming of the Gulf of America also sheds light on the larger connection between geopolitical control and digital infrastructure, as examined by Greenstein, Forman, and Goldfarb (2018). Their research shows how internet infrastructure both shapes and is shaped by location, resulting in feedback loops between digital and physical power. Google's adherence to U.S. government orders is a tangible reflection of the company's major infrastructure, legal jurisdiction, and economic interests remaining centered in the United States, in addition to business policy.
This infrastructural dimension connects to broader patterns of digital dependency identified by scholars of digital coloniality. Birhane (2020) argues that algorithmic systems developed in the Global North often embed Western worldviews and knowledge systems, marginalizing alternative ways of understanding space, place, and territory. The Gulf renaming exemplifies this dynamic – the ability to unilaterally rename a major geographical feature and have that renaming propagated through global digital infrastructure reflects profound asymmetries in cartographic power.
The ability to unilaterally rename a major geographical feature and have that renaming propagated through global digital infrastructure reflects profound asymmetries in cartographic power.
— Analysis of Digital Infrastructure Power
The case also demonstrates the increasing intersection between digital platforms and state power. While early internet discourse emphasized the borderless nature of digital space, the Gulf renaming shows how national governments increasingly assert jurisdiction over global platforms, requiring them to implement geographically specific content policies. This dynamic where the internet is 'split', and different users access different versions of digital platforms based on their location, represents a significant departure from earlier visions of universal digital access.
Digital Inequalities and Cartographic Fairness
The differential implementation of the Gulf renaming connects to broader literature on digital divides and inequalities. While the immediate naming dispute involves major powers (the United States and Mexico), it illuminates how digital platforms mediate access to geographical knowledge in ways that can marginalize smaller or less powerful communities.
Ruiu and Ragnedda's (2017) analysis of social capital and digital divides provides insight into how cartographic disputes play out differently across various communities. Communities with greater digital literacy and platform access may be more aware of how mapping platforms implement political decisions, while others may accept the names they see as neutral geographical facts. This creates what might be termed "cartographic divides" – differential access not just to digital platforms but to awareness of how those platforms shape geographical understanding.
Feminist Internet Perspectives
Additional viewpoints on how digital cartographies might marginalize particular voices and perspectives can be found in the feminist internet scholarship mentioned by Magenya (2020). Magenya's research on internet governance and African feminisms highlights how crucial it is to make sure that digital platforms support different communities rather than upholding established hierarchies of power. The Gulf renaming is an example of the kind of digital exclusion feminist internet researchers aim to fix because it prioritizes U.S. government preferences above other naming traditions and community links to location.
Implications for Digital Sovereignty
The Gulf of America case calls into question digital sovereignty, or the capacity of nations and communities to preserve control over their data and digital infrastructure. The concept of "technocolonialism" as defined by Verdi (2020) offers a framework for comprehending how the consolidation of digital infrastructure in the hands of a small number of multinational firms results in new types of dependency that resemble past colonial connections.
Google's use of different naming reflects both the U.S. government's assertion of digital autonomy (the power to shape the world's digital infrastructure) and its limitations (the inability to regulate how users in other nations perceive the same geographic feature). This issue exemplifies the contradictory nature of digital power in a globalized world, as experts have noted that the demand for national control over digital space clashes with the international, networked nature of internet infrastructure.
Resistance and Alternative Cartographies
The renaming of the Gulf indicates the potential for resistance and alternative cartographies, even as it also shows how powerfully dominant digital platforms may influence geographic thinking. The fact that American users see "Gulf of America" but Mexican users continue to see "Gulf of Mexico" indicates that maintaining consistent cartographic control in a networked system is challenging.
Examples of how marginalized communities could create alternative digital geographies that represent their own knowledge systems and territorial links can be found in indigenous mapping projects and community-based cartographic initiatives. The renaming of the Gulf is an example of the type of top-down cartographic control that these local mapping initiatives, which are sometimes disregarded in popular debates of digital cartography, represent.
Community-Based Alternatives
Indigenous mapping projects and community-based cartographic initiatives offer examples of how marginalized communities can create alternative digital geographies that represent their own knowledge systems and territorial connections. These grassroots mapping efforts, though often overlooked in mainstream discussions of digital cartography, represent a form of resistance to the kind of top-down cartographic control exemplified by the Gulf renaming.
Conclusion
There is much more to Google Maps' renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the "Gulf of America" than just a technical change to geographic data. It is a prime example of the deep connections that define the modern digital landscape between digital colonialism, geopolitical power, and internet infrastructure. We can understand how supposedly neutral technical platforms have evolved into important locations where geopolitical power is exercised and challenged by examining this instance using the theoretical frameworks offered by experts in internet geographies, digital power structures, and digital colonialism.
The case demonstrates that digital platforms are not mere mirrors of geographical reality but active constructors of it, with the power to determine which names, places, and territorial understandings become visible or invisible to different user communities. This cartographic power operates through digital infrastructure that remains concentrated in the Global North, creating new forms of dependency and control that echo historical colonial relationships while taking distinctly digital forms.
Digital platforms are not mere mirrors of geographical reality but active constructors of it, with the power to determine which names, places, and territorial understandings become visible or invisible to different user communities.
— Digital Cartographies Analysis
The importance of digital platforms in our understanding and navigation of geographic space has made issues of digital sovereignty, geographic equality, and resistance to digital colonialism more pressing. While the renaming of the Gulf of America serves as a reminder that other digital geographies are still feasible, it also serves as a warning about the consolidation of cartographic authority in the hands of a few number of platform corporations. Anyone hoping to create more democratic and equitable digital futures that benefit different populations rather than serving to uphold current power structures must have a thorough understanding of these interactions.