I thought one idea/example that Crampton talked about was the importance of mapping during (and after) Hurricane Katrina. It is easy to think about how maps play into our daily lives with examples such as GPS and mapping weather patterns but I hadn’t thought about the significance of a map that showed the changes in geography or topography after a natural disaster. Maps can take us where we want to go or inform us whether or not we need to bring a jacket but what I think is far more interesting is the power of maps to shed light on and articulate change. Beyond informing the general public of a disaster, Google Earth images made it real. It is easy to feel like something that happened thousands of miles away does not affect or you. It is very easy to feel upset by something like Katrina and to want to help but it is also easy to move on with your life if you have not been directly affected. Mapping made the tragedy more accessible and I believe (and yes this is solely my opinion) that the ability to continue and see how slow recovery is makes people more sympathetic to the cause and more likely to help, more likely to ask the government for support. The images show unbiased evidence of reality and evidence of loss. How can mapping help to keep data and information honest in a *post 2016 election* world?