The Street That Wasn't There

The previous post ends by asking "What do you call it ... when you say something you know is not true?"

One possible answer, other than "a lie," is "a trap street."

I first learned about this as a kid, when I inherited my older brother's ten-speed and a road atlas of Middlesex County. My best friend lived in one of two houses on a short street connecting two dead ends, like the crossbar of capital "H." The road atlas, however, showed another street connecting the dead ends further down the block, like a second crossbar across the bottom of the H. This street did not exist, but there it was on the map.*

We showed this to my friend's dad, who explained how such minor fictions are sometimes included on maps to trap copycats who might try to pass off this atlas as their own work. The repetition of such errors would be evidence that the copycats had stolen their work, demonstrating the real source of their imitation.

The same principle applies when tracing the provenance of spin and talking points. Key phrases serve the function of trap streets. The spin doctor introduces a novel phrasing for an inaccuracy, when the precise same wording of the precise same inaccuracy is found elsewhere, we know that this repetition was copied from the original because the false claim, like the street that isn't there, could not have arisen from independent observation of the real world.

Thus, to repeat the specific example from the previous post: this newspaper editorial is copied from this talking-points letter from the RNC. It contains the watermark, trap-street identifier, the misattribution of the phrase "slow bleed."

Unlike a cartographer, however, the spin doctor is all too happy to see his work copied and replicated and multiplied in this fashion, so the editorialists won't need to worry about getting sued for copyright infringement. They may need to worry about violating, and therefore losing, the trust of their readers, who probably expect more from them than acting as the trained-parrot subsidiary of the RNC, but that is a separate matter.

Thomas Nephew (via) points to a Saturday WaPo editorial along similar lines. That editorial parallels the Murtha-smearing of the RNC's memo -- siding against both the former Marine and, strangely, their paper's own excellent reporting on "The Other Walter Reed" -- but it doesn't repeat the tell-tale trap-street fictions that would identify it as stemming directly from the memo.

BarbinMD traces the spin cycle a bit further.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

* It's not the point of this post, but looking back on it, this was something of a significant revelation for me. The disparity between map and terrain forced me to make that distinction, and to recognize the possibility of that distinction, which wasn't something the fundamentalist church and school I attended were interested in recognizing.

But there I was, standing at the dead end of Glenwood Drive, looking at a line on a map that indicated a street that did not exist.

When forced, by a conflict between them, to choose between the text and the real world, I decided to go with the real world. I decided, in effect if not in these precise words, that this is what maps are for, this is what constitutes mapness. I didn't throw away my county atlas -- the vast majority of it remained trustworthy, reliable and indispensable -- but I decided, from there on, to treat maps as maps and not to try riding down streets that weren't really there.

Comments

[PK]

I'm not too clear on the addendum. Are you using map errors as an analogy for systematic theology or scripture in general?

[Bugmaster]

I think that Fred's saying that, just as the map is not the territory, the Scripture is not God's Word (tm). It is merely a map of God's Word, and, as such, it may contain errors, and should be taken with a grain of salt.

At least, that's my (admittedly, atheistic) interpretation of Fred's Holy Word (tm).

[Mullah Cimoc]

Mullah Cimoc say

ameriki people so smart hate bush for let israeli control usa.

is true that neocon people plan war for usa soldier die for israel?

is true neocon want "pearl harbor like event" for make ameriki hate muslim.

Now ameriki so smart after die so many good ameriki men. Now time destroy israel spy and agent in white house and pentagon. good idea. you go girl.

[cjmr's husband]

Yow! Usually the nonsense-spam doesn't get spewed until a post is much older!

We had to explain the local trap-street to my son a few months ago -- it runs through the neighbors' house. Now we have a name for it; thanks!

[Bugmaster]

On a sidenote, I'm pretty saddened to learn that these trap-streets still exist. One would think that in the age of Google Maps and NASA Worldwind, people would stop corrupting their own maps in a pointless attempt to preserve their intellectual property... DRM is bad enough for music and videos and software already, but none of these areas are really important. Maps are important; a deliberate error on the map can cost someone their life.

[Noah Brand]

I'm thinking our buddy the Mullah here is a right-winger trying to get someone to acknowledge his existence, and possibly provoke some reaction that he and his pretend internet friends can mount in the tiny trophy rooms of their souls.

On the other hand, I suppose it's just possible it actually is some sincere nutjob fundamentalist Muslim. As we know, it's close to impossible to distinguish bad parody from the sincere beliefs of authoritarian fundamentalists. (Still can't get over the Jewish Gravity Conspiracy, sorry.)

[Bugmaster]

By the way, Fred's map analogy is another good way to illustrate the way atheists view theists (as continued from one of the previous posts).

If your map is in error, you can drive to the street in question, and see it for yourself, with your own eyes. You can take photos of the street, and use them as evidence (f.ex., in your class-action lawsuit against the map maker). A person who stands in the middle of the street, and declares that the street does not exist, is generally not taken very seriously, regardless of how fervent he is.

But, if your scripture is in error, you can't see the truth for yourself. You can only sense it, or feel it, or experience it in your dreams. You can ask other people about it, but each of them has their own version of the truth. There is no territory; there's only the map, and interpretations of the map. Some people claim that the territory is there, but no one gets to experience it during their lifetime on Earth -- and there's no way to check...

Note, the above is an atheistic perspective on the Scripture, used to demonstrate the perception of theists by atheists. It is not meant as a declaration of some sort of a universal truth. You, the witch-hunter in the back row: put your stake down.

[Mike Timonin]

Oh, we don't use stakes on atheists. Blunt trauma followed by burning. Admittedly, the burning happens AT a stake, but that's entirely different.

[Jesurgislac]

Bugmaster: A person who stands in the middle of the street, and declares that the street does not exist, is generally not taken very seriously, regardless of how fervent he is.

Yes... like the right-wingers who fervently repeat their fantasies about "Europe", find it hard to be taken seriously by Europeans, who are, after all, living in Europe, and can look round at the territory and see that the right-wingers are operating from a fake map.

[hehe]

You are so right about the Europeans - as an American who lives in Europe, it just really isn't possible to convince them about the demographic 'reality' of Eurabia, for example.

On the other hand, it is pretty hard for most Germans to even grasp the idea of an educated person actually feeling evolution is part of Satan's plan over dominion.

Truly, most Americans are living in a fantasy world that is simply not recognizable by the billions of other humans that they share the planet with. And yet it tends to be Americans who feel the rest of the world just doesn't get it - the smae way Americans don't get universal health care, unions, or six weeks vacation, either.

[wintermute]

> You are so right about the Europeans - as an American who lives in Europe, it just really isn't possible to convince them about the demographic 'reality' of Eurabia, for example.

OK, so what is the "demographic 'reality' of Eurabia"? A grand total of 7% of the population of Europe is Muslim - discounting the old Yugoslavia drops it down to about 4% or 5% - (and about half of those are Arabic), which put them on a par with atheists in America; is there a demographic 'reality' of Athierica?

Or... do the scare quotes around 'reality' mean that you don't believe there's actually any such thing? Irony can be so hard to detect on the Intertubes.

On the other hand, even if you're right, I don't see how a strong Arabic population in Europe is a bad thing. I suppose, if you thought that Europe was a theocracy (or a collection of theocracies, I suppose), then it would be a bad thing. But very few governments take their orders from Rome these days...

[A. Kennedy]

A person who stands in the middle of the street, and declares that the street does not exist, is generally not taken very seriously, regardless of how fervent he is.

Strangely, when I first read this, I thought it was talking about atheists (the people who "declare the street does not exist.") However, no insult intended.

[Raka]

wintermute: I believe hehe was referring to the popular right-wing trope that inadequately restrictive immigration policies + the fetid spawning pits of existing Euro-Muslim communities + the effette and over-educated natures of native Europeans keeping them from breeding as god intended = inevitable sharia law in the EU by 2025. I gather that hehe and his European neighbors don't share this opinion.

[wintermute]

Raka: I had a suspicion that that was what he(?) meant, but I just couldn't parse his post to mean that. When he said:

You are so right about the Europeans - as an American who lives in Europe, it just really isn't possible to convince them about the demographic 'reality' of Eurabia, for example.

Who can "them" refer to, other than "the Europeans"? It's the Europeans he's trying to convince of 'reality', not an unnamed subgroup of Americans...

[the opoponax]

I'm pretty saddened to learn that these trap-streets still exist. One would think that in the age of Google Maps and NASA Worldwind, people would stop corrupting their own maps in a pointless attempt to preserve their intellectual property

just to let you know, Google's maps very much ARE governed by intellectual property laws, just like any other map out there, and cannot be used without permission.

maps are ultimately just drawings -- why should their intellectual property issues be any different from other kinds of drawings? if i draw a picture of the Grand Canyon, i own that drawing and can copywright it just as easily as i can a drawing of my living room couch.

i agree with you in an abstract sense that there should, in an ideal world, be no such protection on works of art and media and that they should be free for all to use as we please. but the reality now is that, in a capitalist system, artists need to be able to protect their work from theft -- nobody should be able to profit from someone else's work. and the only logical way to do that is via copywright. and the only logical way to do that within the world of cartography is via trap streets.

[Jesurgislac]

Strangely, when I first read this, I thought it was talking about atheists (the people who "declare the street does not exist.")

I did too. After all, the point of the story is that the street does not exist - except conceptually, on a map.

[wintermute]

> nobody should be able to profit from someone else's work.

I disagree. Everyone profits from other people's work, and if this stopped being the case, nobody would profit at all. If you mean "Nobody should be able to pass of somebody else's work as their own", on the other hand, then I agree entirely.

[Raka used to work for brain-doctors]

wintermute: "Them" does refer to Europeans. Jesu said that right-wingers "find it hard to be taken seriously by Europeans" and hehe agreed that "it just really isn't possible to convince them about the demographic 'reality' of Eurabia". But I think the implication was that right-wingers were the ones trying to convince the Europeans, not that hehe was.

Darn message boards. No threaded comments, no tone of voice, no body language. It's 1/3 reading comprehension, 1/3 judgement based on previous experience, and 1/3 total guesswork.

[Raka takes a long walk]

I need to stop doing cutesy things with the "Name" field, since I always forget to undo it for the next comment.

[Bugmaster]

@the opoponax:

Protecting your intellectual property is fine and dandy. But deliberately corrupting maps to feed false information to your users just to protect your IP is crossing the line. So is putting a rootkit on their PC just to make sure they don't steal your music (thanks, Sony !). Only it's more dangerous in case of maps, because in case of emergency, those 15 minutes you spend looking for a nonexistent street could cost someone their life.

There's no dichotomy between "everything is free" or "every piece of content I produce is deliberately corrupted". It's possible to protect your property without going to extremes.

[Bugmaster]

@A. Kennedy:

Well, there was that story recently about some guy who claims he's God, or at least some sort of a mini-god. And the Mormons claim that they can become gods (albeit, after death). These people have a lot of followers (and the Mormons even have their own state, heh). But, most Christians believe these people are wrong... But there's no way to check. It just comes down to feelings, devotion, and inner seeking, for each person individually. It's not as easy, or as clear-cut, as walking out on the sidewalk and checking if there's an extra street. That's what I was trying to convey.

[Chris]

The other common use of a 'trap street' practice would be the deliberate entry of mis-identifying information when it's obvious that the information will be used to advertise to you.

From a conversation this weekend, I know a guy named Sandy who gets mail for 'Sanfy', another guy named Harold who gets mail for 'Haslod' and that the previous occupants of my house, Deborah & Monica, get mail for 'Deborah G Monica'.

'Sanfy' and 'Haslod' were useful for weeding out junk mail without bothering to open it. The last one caused me a bit of moral quandry: You're not supposed to chuck out other peoples' mail, but does that apply when you're certain the person never existed?

[the opoponax]

@ wintermute:

yeah, that's what i meant. though i do think it has more to do with profit than just pride -- sure, pull my photos from the web and tell all your friends you took them. just don't sell prints for profit or put them into a gallery show under your own name, or i'll be knocking on your door.

@ bugmaster:

just so you know, most trap streets are dead ends or very small streets in marginal parts of the map, or other similarly inconsequential applications. i don't think it ever happens that any real consequences occur due to the cartographer's addition of trap streets, let alone someone's death. i would assume mapmakers specifically would NOT choose to add a trap street that might be apt to look like a good shortcut or confuse travelers trying to make their way through the area.

for instance in Fred's example the map made it look like there were 2 connections between streets when in reality there was only one -- if you were lost in that neighborhood and the street you thought would go all the way through didn't, you'd just take a right and find the real connection within a few blocks.

and while i'm against sony's rootkits (i think it really just crosses a line), i don't think that's in any way relevant. trap streets are the only really logical way to prove the uniqueness of your specific map, especially as we move from paper to electronic media. they're not hurting anyone or really damaging anything, except apparently some unbreachable concept of "CORRECTNESS" you seem to have.

[hehe]

Well, I can agree that the Internet is a hard place to convey subtle distinctions.

'Eurabia' is an American right wing fantasy, which grows through repetition in classic 'big lie' style, without much factual basis - unless you think Turks, Persians, Indonesians, or Africans, for example, are Arabs. Or that a secular 2nd generation German/Turkish business owner shares something with a washed up Nigerian refugee on the Spanish coast, while both in turn share something with a 3rd generation British/Pakistani store clerk. Sure, all of them are just part of Eurabia - if your information comes from reliable sources, as compared to actually talking to Europeans. Who have become rarer in the U.S., I would venture to guess - America is much more isolated than most living there seem to actually be able to understand. (A Lebanese friend in 1994 thought that this growing isolation - WARNING WARNING - was deliberate - TERROR ALERT - and intended to provide the proper atmosphere to carry out various policies - TERRORIST THREAT - unhindered by democratic checks and balances. Obviously, being Lebanese, he is part of the Eurabian plot - or maybe, he just understood what was going on?)

As many of these right wing individuals are actively working to create, or at least promote, a theocracy in the world's first secular republic, it is unfortunately natural that they assume that other groups are working for the same goals, especially in the case of secular and prosperous Europe - after all, anywhere with universal health care, strong unions, six weeks vacation, unembarassed human nudity and birth control, strict gun laws, and so on (to describe Germany) is obviously a place just begging for a good theocratic thumping from those who at least understand the concept of treating women like breeding stock. Even if the Eurabia bunch of theocrats are the Devil's minions, at least they are the path to righteousness - for example, all true believers can recognize each other by the blood of the unbelievers they wish to kill as the way to bring about a world full of god's peace and justice.

Sadly, much of what was written above was neither sarcastic nor ironic nor subtle - it is just easier to accept that way.

[wintermute]

hehe: Ah, OK. That makes more sense. Thanks for clearing it up.

[Noah Brand]

On using names as trap streets for mailing lists: One of my girlfriends once wanted a free crucifix, so she sent away for one from some religious organization whose goals she didn't like or share. Might've been Focus on the Family, might've been something else. Point is, she made sure to give them a fake name, so now we can tell exactly who these upstanding folks have been selling her info to, every time we get junk mail for Dolores Haze. (Google it if you don't get it.)

[A. Kennedy]

per Bugmaster:

But there's no way to check.

Not true. We have a way to check to see if people can become gods or not, according to Mormon theology -- we wait and see. There's no (obvious to atheists) way to find out right now, but I think most people would agree that we will know in time.

[Bugmaster]

There's no (obvious to atheists) way to find out right now...

Well, atheists operate on the assumption that "right now" is all they have. It's a good assumption, because you never see people coming back from the dead, so it's unlikely that they'll show up anytime soon to tell us their story. By analogy, atheists believe that the Solar System only has a single sun, because you never see that other sun anywhere. Atheists could be completely wrong on both accounts (or just one of them), of course, but that's life for you.

[Spherical Time]

Snopes does the same thing. They have a section of a couple of legends that have been mistaken for fact by an assortment of companies. Although now I can't find that section, so this may just be an Urban Legend.

Huh. I can't find the "Mr. Ed was a zebra" section anywhere. How annoying.

[mds]

By analogy, atheists believe that the Solar System only has a single sun, because you never see that other sun anywhere.

Fools! Rejecting the reality of Nemesis!
BWA-ha-ha-ha-haaaaa!

[Raka]

I can't find the "Mr. Ed was a zebra" section anywhere.

It's my favorite section.

[ako]

Strangely, when I first read this, I thought it was talking about atheists (the people who "declare the street does not exist.") However, no insult intended.

No offense, but disagreement. In my experience, it's more like being insistently told there's a street right there, and this particular map shows you the way. Then driving out and finding an empty field, or a pond, or a house or something. Then being told you read the map wrong and the road is precisely where marked. Then hearing that all contradictory maps are false but this one's absolutely true, that you can't get GPS coordinates or have someone show you the way, and that no matter how many times you fail to find it, that doesn't mean it's a flawed map or a nonexistent street, but is purely your fault for reading it wrong or not seeing a street like you're supposed to.

There's no (obvious to atheists) way to find out right now, but I think most people would agree that we will know in time.

Not necessarily. I don't see any reason to suppose, in the absence of deities or afterlives, that there's going to be a moment of realization. It would rather depend on the manner of death and what happened to the brain, as well as a person's predisposition to interpret their final perceptions to fit with their beliefs. If, as I think, there is no god of any sort, then I'd consider the final moment of revelation or confirmation a rare and unlikely event. If there is an afterlife, then the final understanding would be contingent on what that particular afterlife involved (Throne of Judgement, picking/being assigned a new incarnation, wandering the world as a ghost). A final answer being offered doesn't strike me as anything like a certainty.

Then again, I'm not most people, so maybe it is a widespread expectation.

[Steve]

Trap Streets. Interesting idea. Can anyone verify mapmakers really do this to avoid people copying their work, or was this just some guys (Fred's friend's dads) theory as to why they are there.

I've seen streets like this on maps, but they always seem to be in a place where is seems a street was intended to go, but never finished. Like perhaps they were building a development, and intended for the outermost street to be Pine Drive...so even though it wasn't built at the time the map was made, the map maker added it to the map based on the developers plans so that the map wouldn't soon be out-of-date. But then plans changed and they stopped at Maple Drive and never built Pine Drive, for what ever reason.

For most of the streets I've seen like this on a map, you could see where the street was to go...like one street had a makeshift deadend that surely looked like it was intended to be extended.

Just wondering if this notion of a "Trap Street" is real or an urban legend.

[Steve]

Well, I think I'm answering my own question:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street

[Nell]

John Bresnahan created the "slow bleed" trap street originally, and out of whole cloth. Just sitting there in the first paragraph of the story, not supported by anything any of the Dems or antiwar lobbyists said about the proposal, ready for use in savaging the Murtha proposal before it got anywhere.

If I were Dems on the hill, I'd quit talking to anyone anywhere near the Politico and stick to CQ and The Hill. They're the equivalent of Fox News for Congressional coverage: 24/7, with space to fill, and eager to play their part in the Republican spin cycle.