I found this section of the article quite strange:
We had been in Poland and Austria. In those places the Google maps showed all the tourist sites, but also famous landmarks, museums, and churches , right from the beginning.
But when I Googled Prague, I saw just hotels, landmarks, museums about Communism, and even a Sex Machines Museum. There were only two churches, one connected with Jan Hus, who is a figure revered by many Czechs, and the other a huge landmark that dominates the skyline, and two synagogues of great historic importance. Yet I knew the city was full of churches and synagogues. It was only when I went one or two levels deeper that all the historic churches and synagogues appeared on the map. The roots of the nation and its history began to appear, and its actual physical layout, not just the highlights carefully selected somewhere else.
She seems to be implying that google maps doesn’t present visitors with the locations of most churches, but my own quick test shows this is complete nonsense. There’s no conspiracy or consumer-driven motion to hide away the churches.
Either that, or she’s despairing that the priority list for tourists doesn’t include every single little church at the very top. She brushes aside the 2 most significant churches as “only 2 churches”, as though 2 churches topping the tourism charts isn’t enough!? Of course magnificent historic buildings like St. Vitus Cathedral and the noteworthy Bethlehem Chapel will be the most popular. I’m really baffled as to how Ann thinks tourism works.