UN Calls for a Switch to the Equal Earth Map

The United Nations has reportedly called for greater use of the Equal Earth projection, a world map designed to represent the relative size of continents and countries more accurately than the traditional Mercator projection.

For centuries, the Mercator map has been widely used for navigation and in educational materials. However, its visual representation significantly enlarges territories located farther from the Equator. Greenland, for example, appears comparable in size to Africa on many Mercator maps, despite Africa being vastly larger in reality.

The Equal Earth projection seeks to correct this distortion by preserving the proportional areas of landmasses. Supporters argue that this provides a more realistic visual understanding of the world’s geography, particularly when comparing the territories of countries in the Global North and Global South.

According to the text circulating online, the proposal was supported by 164 countries, while the United States was the only country to vote against it. The claim that Washington opposed the measure because the new map would reduce its perceived geographical influence, however, should be treated as satire unless confirmed by an official UN record.

The controversy has nevertheless revived a broader debate about how maps shape perceptions of power and territory. Cartographic projections are not politically neutral in their visual effects: the way the world is drawn can influence how people perceive the relative importance and size of different regions.

The text concludes with a deliberately provocative joke aimed at the United States: if the country objects to having its apparent geographical prominence reduced on a world map, perhaps the same principle should apply to digital maps.

“Then let them reduce their size on Google Maps. What’s wrong with ‘Lake America’?”

Behind the humor lies a serious question: can the way we represent the world also influence the way we understand it?