Google Maps Bold Font City Names (sale, how much, moving)

[g500]

So, I was playing on Google Maps and noticed that certain cities (typically the largest cities) are listed on the map in large bold letters. Check it out by going to Google Maps and zooming in until the map scale says 50 miles.

Below is a list of all US cities (43 cities) that are in bold lettering:
Boston
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Washington
Cleveland
Columbus
Cincinnati
Charlotte
Louisville
Indianapolis
Detroit
Chicago
Milwaukee
Minneapolis
St. Louis
Kansas City
Nashville
Atlanta
Jacksonville
Tampa
Orlando
Miami
Houston
Dallas
Fort Worth
Austin
San Antonio
Oklahoma City
Albuquerque
Denver
El Paso
Phoenix
Tucson
Las Vegas
Los Angeles
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose
Sacramento
Portland
Seattle

Here is a list of the largest US metro areas that are NOT in bold lettering:
Raleigh
Salt Lake City
New Orleans
Memphis
Richmond
Honolulu
Riverside
Virginia Beach
Providence
Birmingham
Buffalo
Hartford


Smallest cities (by metro area population) that ARE in bold lettering:
Albuquerque
El Paso
Tucson
Oklahoma City
Louisville
Jacksonville
Milwaukee


Anyone have any thoughts on this? Should Google remove some of the "smallest" cities from bold lettering and add the "largest cities" not already in bold lettering? Anyway just something to think about! Honestly not a big deal, but someone may find this interesting.

[The_Quiet_One]

I don't know the answer but I can give a few guesses. I would imagine it's dependent on the population of only the city itself, not metro area. Every town of the metro area is listed individually. How big a name appears probably indicates the population within the boundaries of only the place name. Some maps also base their text size hierarchy on importance, such as giving more weight to capital cities. It looks like Google does a little of both depending on how much you zoom in (they use importance hierarchy to show which cities appear the closer you zoom in and they use population hierarchy to determine how big that name is or whether it's bolded). Because it's Google, whatever they're doing to determine importance is probably the work of algorithms based on search results and advertising revenue.

[Enean]

Originally Posted by The_Quiet_One

I don't know the answer but I can give a few guesses. I would imagine it's dependent on the population of only the city itself, not metro area. Every town of the metro area is listed individually. How big a name appears probably indicates the population within the boundaries of only the place name. Some maps also base their text size hierarchy on importance, such as giving more weight to capital cities. It looks like Google does a little of both depending on how much you zoom in (they use importance hierarchy to show which cities appear the closer you zoom in and they use population hierarchy to determine how big that name is or whether it's bolded). Because it's Google, whatever they're doing to determine importance is probably the work of algorithms based on search results and advertising revenue.

I was just writing a response, that was similar enough to yours, that I didn't post it. I agree, in that a map wouldn't consider the MSA, but rather, the city proper.

[TacoSoup]

^ Make that three. I guess the OP doesn’t remember/know atlases, globes, and paper maps. The city’s size and boldness was due to it’s population, and not that of the metro population. Capital cities were also larger than their appropriate size with a star next to it (something I just noticed google maps oddly doesn’t do?).

I was just looking at San Diego County on google maps and they did an accurate job with letter size and boldness in regards to population of the various cities that were:
<50K
>50K
>100K
>200K
>1M

[g500]

Originally Posted by TacoSoup

^ Make that three. I guess the OP doesn’t remember/know atlases, globes, and paper maps. The city’s size and boldness was due to it’s population, and not that of the metro population. Capital cities were also larger than their appropriate size with a star next to it (something I just noticed google maps oddly doesn’t do?).

I was just looking at San Diego County on google maps and they did an accurate job with letter size and boldness in regards to population of the various cities that were:
<50K
>50K
>100K
>200K
>1M

Taco, I study maps all the time. And I strongly dislike city proper as a measure of scale (not to say metro or urban population are perfect). But more importantly, Google is not using city proper here (Fresno, Mesa, Colorado Springs, Raleigh, Omaha are not bolded yet all have city propers larger than some of the currently bolded cities in my op)

The point of this thread was to generate questions like: Why is El Paso is bold but Raleigh isn't? Albuquerque is bold but SLC isn't? What is the cut-off for the next font level (Memphis, New Orleans, Providence fonts for example)? Why are "43" cities large bold? Is something revealed by which cities are bolded? (Like are these the most searched cities on Google Maps as someone suggested?)

Btw, I will say I have been paying attention to this specific topic for some time now (a few years) and at least for the USA the bolded cities have not changed (no additions or subtractions).

I mean this topic really is not a big deal. It's really not even a small deal! It's merely for nit-picky intellectual discussion is all. I'm surprised to be getting responses on this thread at all actually, because it does seem trivial. I'm an OCD city nerd so it obviously peaks my interest. At the end of the day, Google is gonna Google. So yeah, that's all. I'm fine with it the way it is, just was trying to analyze and discuss.

Edit: fix spelling errors.

[Canes2006Champs]

I figured it was based on population.

[TacoSoup]

Originally Posted by g500

Taco, I study maps all the time. And I strongly dislike city proper as a measure of scale (not to say metro or urban population are perfect). But more importantly, Google is not using city proper here (Fresno, Mesa, Colorado Springs, Raleigh, Omaha are not bolded yet all have city propers larger than some of the currently bolded cities in my op)

The point of this thread was to generate questions like: Why is El Paso is bold but Raleigh isn't? Albuquerque is bold but SLC isn't? What is the cut-off for the next font level (Memphis, New Orleans, Providence fonts for example)? Why are "43" cities large bold? Is something revealed by which cities are bolded? (Like are these the most searched cities on Google Maps as someone suggested?)

Btw, I will say I have been paying attention to this specific topic for some time now (a few years) and at least for the USA the bolded cities have not changed (no additions or subtractions).

I mean this topic really is not a big deal. It's really not even a small deal! It's merely for nit-picky intellectual discussion is all. I'm surprised to be getting responses on this thread at all actually, because it does seem trivial. I'm an OCD city nerd so it obviously peaks my interest. At the end of the day, Google is gonna Google. So yeah, that's all. I'm fine with it the way it is, just was trying to analyze and discuss.

Edit: fix spelling errors.

I hear you, and after reading a couple of your other posts, I respect your knowledge on not only this topic, but cities/history in general.

I only looked at San Diego and Los Angeles and it seemed no different than the maps, globes, and atlases I grew up on, sans the star for capitals. I honestly didn’t look at other cities/metros to see if they’re represented right? I just assumed it was how it was growing up.

For as much as I think MSA’s (don’t get me started on CSA’s) can be very convoluted in regards to population, at the end of the day they do make more sense than city population.

*FYI I was an OCD city nerd too growing up and I’d go to the library to get updated info compared to my dated garage sale encyclopedias and National Geographics I had, lol. My head probably would’ve exploded if I had the access to info now as a kid? I’m in my early 40’s, and my wife is hardly 30, and it’s amazing the different world we grew up in regards to gathering information.

[NigerianNightmare]

I don't think it's by population, while that certainly plays a significant role it isn't the deciding factor. Both VB and Providence have larger city populations and metro populations than several cities on the list. I think geography certainly plays a role, maybe its by popularity, and I don't mean search popularity outright as tourist towns are well known but clout in the metro sense. Smaller Western Metros are more likely to make the list and Larger East Coast metros are less likely to make the list, likely due to regional influence and not wanting to crowd the area. It could also be population within 30 miles, but I doubt Tucson has more than VB.

[g500]

Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare

I don't think it's by population, while that certainly plays a significant role it isn't the deciding factor. Both VB and Providence have larger city populations and metro populations than several cities on the list. I think geography certainly plays a role, maybe its by popularity, and I don't mean search popularity outright as tourist towns are well known but clout in the metro sense. Smaller Western Metros are more likely to make the list and Larger East Coast metros are less likely to make the list, likely due to regional influence and not wanting to crowd the area. It could also be population within 30 miles, but I doubt Tucson has more than VB.

Ding ding ding! I think you are onto something. Still odd then that SLC is not bolded considering it is the largest city in the absolute middle of nowhere for hundreds of miles in all directions (and meets criteria of other bolded cities). Somewhat same for Omaha, but not as compelling of an argument. Disclosure: I have no horse in the race for either of these cities, never visited, no connection, etc.

I think you are correct, bolding too many cities in one area would clutter the map and could make it less visually appealing.

Edit: spelling.

[animatedmartian]

Originally Posted by g500

So, I was playing on Google Maps and noticed that certain cities (typically the largest cities) are listed on the map in large bold letters. Check it out by going to Google Maps and zooming in until the map scale says 50 miles.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? Should Google remove some of the "smallest" cities from bold lettering and add the "largest cities" not already in bold lettering? Anyway just something to think about! Honestly not a big deal, but someone may find this interesting.

If an area has a lot of local administrative divisions, like a large metropolitan area with a lot of little suburbs, Google will prioritize highlighting the central city and removing clustered cities/suburbs. Emphasis is then placed on physical land area.

So basically, the more land area a city has relative to its neighboring cities/suburbs, the more likely it will have a bold label.

Here is a list of the largest US metro areas that are NOT in bold lettering:
Raleigh
Salt Lake City
New Orleans
Memphis
Richmond
Honolulu
Riverside
Virginia Beach
Providence
Birmingham
Buffalo
Hartford

These cities aren't much larger than the suburbs/cities near them. Therefore if you were to zoom to these cities, most suburbs and nearby cities would be given equal weight.

Smallest cities (by metro area population) that ARE in bold lettering:
Albuquerque
El Paso
Tucson
Oklahoma City
Louisville
Jacksonville
Milwaukee

These cities are very large relative to their suburbs. If you zoom to these, you'll be shown mostly the largest suburbs. To see smaller suburbs would require you to zoom closer.