arabic.euronews.com
Campaign to Replace Mercator Map Projection Gains Momentum
The campaign, "Correct the Map," pushes for replacing the size-distorting Mercator projection with the Gall-Peters projection to accurately represent Africa's size, backed by the African Union and gaining traction among international organizations.
- What is the impact of the Mercator projection map on the global perception of Africa's size and significance?
- The Mercator projection map, created in the 16th century, distorts the size of continents, exaggerating those near the poles while diminishing those near the equator. This has perpetuated a false impression of Africa's size and importance, impacting media, education, and policies.
- How does the "Correct the Map" campaign aim to address the historical misrepresentation of Africa's size on maps?
- A campaign, "Correct the Map," advocates for the adoption of the Gall-Peters projection ("Equal Earth"), which accurately represents continental sizes. The campaign, led by Africa No Filter and Speak Up Africa, highlights the Mercator projection's negative impact on Africa's representation and calls for its replacement in educational materials and global institutions.
- What are the future implications of adopting the Gall-Peters projection in educational materials and international organizations?
- The African Union officially supports the campaign, viewing it as crucial for restoring Africa's global standing. While Google Maps uses a 3D globe on computers, mobile versions still default to Mercator. The World Bank uses Gall-Peters for static maps and plans to update its electronic maps; the UN will review the request to adopt Gall-Peters.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the issue as a campaign to correct a historical injustice, emphasizing the negative impact of the Mercator projection on the perception of Africa. The headline and introduction immediately establish this framing, potentially influencing the reader's interpretation before presenting alternative viewpoints. This framing, while understandable given the campaign's goals, could be balanced with a more neutral presentation of the cartographic debate.
Language Bias
The language used generally maintains a neutral tone, although words and phrases like "haphazard size", "false impression", and "corrected map" carry some implicit bias. More neutral alternatives might include: "distorted size", "misleading representation", and "alternative map". The overall tone is one of advocacy for change.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses on the distortion of Africa's size in the Mercator projection and the campaign to replace it with the Gall-Peters projection (or similar). However, it omits discussion of other map projections and their own potential biases or limitations. While acknowledging limitations of space is valid, the lack of broader context regarding map projections might leave the reader with an incomplete understanding of cartographic choices and their implications. The article might benefit from mentioning alternative projections beyond Gall-Peters and briefly explaining their strengths and weaknesses.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified dichotomy between the Mercator projection and the Gall-Peters projection. While highlighting the distortions of the Mercator projection, it doesn't fully explore the potential biases or limitations inherent in other projections. Presenting the Gall-Peters as a simple solution ignores the complexities of mapmaking and the absence of a single 'perfect' projection.
Sustainable Development Goals
The campaign to replace the Mercator projection with the Gall-Peters projection aims to address the historical distortion of Africa's size and importance in global representations. This directly counters the perpetuation of biased perceptions and unequal power dynamics. The use of a more accurate map can contribute to a fairer representation of Africa in education, media, and policy, fostering more equitable relationships.