Ghana, not Africa.
When will Westerners stop treating Africa as a monoculture.
When will Westerners stop treating Africa as a monoculture.
Either of these better titles or no?
“…from Ghana, Africa…”
“…from Africa’s Ghana…”
(China, Asia & Asia’s China don’t really fit so probably not?)
The Asia comparison would work better if instead of talking about China we were talking about Laos.
No need to cherry-pick some random metric and try and justify a point that's not worth justifying.
I'm not justifying anything. I also think it's more polite to say "Ghana" rather than "Africa". I just don't agree with the arguments.
Now, if you asked the same about Pakistan or Nigeria (#5 and #6 in terms of population, but far smaller and with far shorter sea borders), I'd bet that far fewer people would be able to pinpoint those with the same accuracy (whether in the English-speaking world or not).
You still need to know that it's the second-largest country in the world though
This goes beyond mere politeness; that you used this word is a bit suggestive. Refusing to acknowledge an identity is far more than just a lack of politeness.
Asia is only ~50% larger than Africa.
I expected different posters for the same movie from different African countries.
Imagine buying a cook book of European cuisine only listing UK dishes.
A sample from the website's About page:
> this site is my attempt at creating something that’s dedicated to discovering the hidden gems of the online realm (whether they be in the form of academic discourse, cutting-edge technology, cultural commentary, or artistic expression) and sharing them with care and consideration.
How is treating a country in the second largest continent in the world - which contains more than 50 countries, most of which have very distinct cultures - as representative of that continent showing care and consideration? Ghana is not an unfamiliar country, and most people, at the very least, know it's in Africa. If I confused Mexico with Canada, or Germany with Albania, I'd be treated as a dimwit, but somehow it's totally fine if I don't know the difference between Ghana and Kenya.
I agree with the parent comment; this "unfamiliar country" business needs to stop.
- To sensationalize the story by positioning it as a another manifestation of a supposed "African" nature/character.
- The idea that African countries by themselves are too insignificant to seek/need to know about, but an entire continents? OK, maybe. Many people are comfortable in ignorance, real or feigned.
Putting Ghana on the title would have been just fine. I'm Ghanaian btw.
The only debatable part is that it's not all of Africa. But otherwise it's a very accurate description of the whole article.
Clickbait is "You won't believe the art that came out of this continent!" or "Look at the wild things artists did to attract an audience!".
Are you claiming that's not clickbait?
Like a tour guide for the US and you only list places in Texas.
This is merely an example where the writer of the headline believes that the average reader may not be familiar with the country of Ghana. If the demographics include Americans, I'd have to guess they were spot on. (I'm American, I know how Americans are.)
Would it really be similarly offensive if a headline referred to something happening in "South America" when actually it happened in Guyana? Or, a headline about something happening in "Europe" when actually it happened in Andorra? None of these headlines are inaccurate. They're just not specific.
I can obviously see why this is frustrating but to me it's a complete misunderstanding to blame the person writing the headline.
Yes. It's like saying that the art and culture in Georgetown is very similar to the art and culture in Santiago. Especially when you claim to be an arts-and-culture website. Would a Texan like being stereotyped by a tourist who thinks all of America is just like New York City?
> Or, a headline about something happening in "Europe" when actually it happened in Andorra?
What many people here are trying to point out is that the chances of seeing such a line about a European country (even a relatively unknown one) is waaaay less than the chances of seeing such a line about African/South American countries.
That does happen, and I don't think very many people consider it grossly offensive, the vast majority of people would probably find it mildly amusing at worst. (It is not lost on me that people feel this way partly because American culture is well-known around the world, so people are less defensive of it.)
On the other hand though, I don't think that the headline being less specific means that the article is making generalizations about Africa. The article itself is pretty immediately clear on that matter.