But maybe they're really trying to say their visual information about Africa comes entirely from the Lion King poster.
By my late teens I had worked out that setting sun was indicative of a certain kind of book.
Senegal, Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Botswana, and South Africa/Eswatini/Lesotho have good coverage. Egypt and Tunisia have a little.
Anyway, you get a pretty good sampling of what those countries are like, from the small distant villages to the huge megalopolises.
It's also worth following some African tech people on twitter. Nigeria in particular seems to have a lot of developers and tech entrepreneurs on Twitter.
i didn't see any references, which articles and books are you referring to?
It would be nice to hear about some other things, but there does not seem to be much available.
Edit: since I am not allowed to reply to further comments by HN, I paste my reply to the most recent comment below:
"Really? Yes all those things exist, also on other continents, but we are talking about how representative they are of Africa in general."
That seems rather simplistic. There are things that are specific to Africa. Female mutilation only exist in my country because it was imported from places like Africa, for example. And we also don't have free roaming Elephants anywhere on my continent. Also no hunger epidemics.
"Much of what exactly?"
Stories describing a version of Africa that the author of the article would approve of.
Yes FGM exists in many places in Africa. It also exists in many places in Asia. So what? Regular mass shootings are a peculiarly American thing. Does that there is nothing else to discuss about the US?
Yes elephants roam in parts of Africa, usually in national parks. I fail to see how that’s a bad thing. But also, how that implies that any wiring about Africa is incomplete without alluding to that fact.
> there does not seem to be much available
Much of what exactly? If you mean positive stories about Africa, there are plenty that can be told. Those stories do not sell newspapers internationally though.
However, the article was not even talking about writing positively about Africa, which in itself is patronizing. It was about writing _accurately_ about Africa.
For examplE, right now internet access is expensive across many countries in Africa. This is a challenge to budding entrepreneurs and ordinary people. An article about that would be representative of the concern of many actual Africans.
Edits: To respond to edits above
I don't think you make a good point here. Should female genital mutilation in Africa not be discussed, just because it also happens in some places in Asia? Should mass shootings in America not be discussed?
"But also, how that implies that any wiring about Africa is incomplete without alluding to that fact."
But it also is not incorrect to allude to the fact, as there are indeed Elephants in Africa.
" It was about writing _accurately_ about Africa."
There is female genital mutilation in Africa and those other things, so writing about it is not inaccurate.
"An article about that would be representative of the concern of many actual Africans."
Everybody is free to write such an article.
For example, if a preponderance of articles about Africa are about something that does not really affect the life of the vast majority of Africans, it gives a misleading impression of how life in Africa is actually like.
That you miss this basic understanding is baffling. A trope or cliche is not false. It is precisely a trope and cliche because, although true, it is misleading overall.
That’s why I have the example of the mass shootings, the point of which you seems to have missed. If all writing about America is framed within the mass shootings, that would be a very one-dimensional view of the US indeed. Writers who perpetuate a fixation on narrow and naive cliches do a lot of damage because the stories that need to be told are being displaced by what is meaningless
Another example is what TFA mentions: if almost all books about Africa have this ridiculous image of an acacia tree on the cover (although there are indeed acacia trees in Africa), it means they don’t actually educate about the varied landscapes and cityscapes of Africa.
If you want to educate about varied landscapes, do it. But don't complain about the lack of mentioning of varied landscapes in an article about female genital mutilation (which according to the WHO affects 200 million women, so it is not that exotic to write about https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-geni... ).
Unfortunately what TFA ultimately did is let me learn more about the stereotypes in Africa, but nothing about its varied landscapes. If you want to educate about varied landscapes, just educate about varied landscapes.
I actually still don't know what I should be looking at to see the "real" Africa now, after so many discussions. I only get that there are issues that for some reasons I should not be looking at.
Like school shootings in the US. Should I worry about that when I consider sending my kids to school in the US, or not?
You are now more aware of red flags in writing related to this topic. The rest requires work, there is no shortcut to understanding a continent.
This post is just a critique of intellectual laziness.