Apple May Soon Join Google In Renaming Lake Ontario After Donald Trump’s Executive Order

Steelman: both sides, in good faith

The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.

The case for

Supporters argue that a nation has every right to determine how its own official maps and geographic databases refer to features on or near its territory, just as other countries rename places to reflect national identity or historical moments. They see the change as a legitimate, largely symbolic assertion of American pride and sovereignty, and as one lever among many – alongside tariffs – that a president can use to press for better terms in a trade dispute with a neighbouring country. To this side, mockery of the name misses the point: symbolic gestures are a normal part of statecraft and cost little in practical terms.

The case against

Critics argue that Lake Ontario is a shared, binational body of water whose name predates both the United States and Canada by centuries, so unilaterally renaming it disregards history, geography and the interests of the Canadians who border and depend on it. They see the move as needlessly provocative amid an already tense trade relationship, risking further ill will for a largely symbolic win, and worry that pressuring private companies like Apple and Google to alter maps blurs the line between government policy and corporate neutrality. For this side, respecting long-established, mutually recognised place names is a basic courtesy between allies and a matter of geographic accuracy, not a partisan issue.