the
true size of Africa
The
Economist distinguished itself by its superb news presentation,
both the writing and the graphics. I really enjoy reading the
articles (in between lines also) and exploring deeper information
from the images (there it is, surely). However, recently I was at a
loss with the image (map actually, see it on the right) attached to
the article on Africa’s economy (Bulging in the middle) on
Oct. 20, 2012. For two reasons: (1) from economic point of view, I
can’t reason the selection of countries filling up the Africa’s
outline; (2) from the fact that all map projections distort in one
way or another, I question the presentation area-wise. The image
below, where I matched the colors from the image on the right, shows
that the countries selected are of moderate latitude - which keeps
distortions somewhat at bay. And map projec- tions could be very
misleading: I can put whole Africa into the outline of Canada (with
a room to spare), and two Africas into the outline of Russia ( ROLLOVER
the image on the right).
But
wait, I say to myself — do other people see it my way? Search the
web! Yes, certainly, area-wise and meaning-wise. Starting with The
Economist’s stuff: the true size of Africa was the subject of
the Graphic Detail, a blog site (http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail,
where a new chart or map is published every working day), on Nov.
10, 2010. To summarize, The Economist’s map ( ROLLOVER
the bottom image, the map on the right) is using Gall's Stereo-
graphic Cylindrical Projection to minimize shape distortions of the
Mercator projection (the map on the left). |

OK,
I can settle for one of the projections but however you look at it,
Africa is much bigger than it looks on most maps. So back to my
original point: whatever the projection, I don’t see a message
related to Africa’s economy. |