What makes bike maps so funny?

NPR, my favored audio accompaniment as I prepare my kids’ lunches for school each morning, really let me down today. At 7:30 a.m., I heard the “Diversions” theme music, which usually means a goofy news blurb is coming, something I almost always enjoy. Today’s item was of great interest to me: Google has unveiled a new mapping feature that provides directions by bike to any destination, expanding their current driving directions mapping program.

The lampooning aspect of the story seemed to be that the duration of the trip could be excessively long, since the trip length is determined by “average pedal power,” not driving speed. But isn’t that just what it ought to be? The commentator, Renee Montaigne, noted that serious cyclists should be able to make much better time. That’s also true of Google maps’ driving directions, of course — if you exceed the speed limits, you’ll make better time than they suggest on the directions.

Google maps now includes four options for their directions: by car, by public transit, walking, and bicycling. If you select bicycling, you’ll receive a recommended route that avoids large hills and congested streets. The route Google recommends for my own bike commute to work is altogether different from the driving directions, and proposes a way to mitigate the hill between my home and my workplace, following local streets I hadn’t considered before.

For me, Google’s new mapping tool, developed in conjunction with the Rails to Trails Conservancy, is a useful tool that gives legitimacy to trips not taken in a car. It’s about time we stopped acting as if cars are the only way to get from here to there. So why is that so funny?