August 14, 2008
Darfur shrinks
It used to be so easy. If you wanted to give your readers an idea of the sheer scale of Darfur, you told them it was "about the size of France".
I've done it at least six times in the past year. (See this story from Tuesday.) And I've never had a complaint.
Then some busybody actually goes and does some measurements.
And it turns out that Darfur is actually quite a bit smaller than France.
The above busybody suggests Spain as a closer comparison. Personally, I've always been a stickler for accuracy. So, from now on, I am going to use Turkmenistan.
- France - 547,030 sq km (53,850 sq km bigger that Darfur)
- Spain - 504,782 sq km (11,602 sq km bigger than Darfur)
- Darfur - 493,180 sq km
- Turkmenistan - 488,100 sq km (5,080 sq km smaller than Darfur)
Figures from Mongabay apart from the Darfur statistic which was taken, on trust, from South of West (what do you expect - fact checking?)
Posted by aheavens at August 14, 2008 9:16 AM
Comments
Darfur is smaller than France by 9.8% and smaller than Spain by 2.3%. Not much of a size difference IMHO.
Would suggest you say "it is about the size of Spain" or "it is about the size of France." Most people will understand the size and scale of Darfur then.
By using Turkmenistan you are sending the signal that Darfur is a small place, even though they are nearly the same size. Most people know very little about Turkmenistan. We assume it is a small place.
Your goal is to give you readers accurate and understandable information. using Spain or France for size comparison does this effectively, Turkmenistan does not.
Posted by: David Damore at August 15, 2008 2:11 AM
I always wondered about that. I guess France still gives something to compare with.
Posted by: Black Kush at August 18, 2008 4:10 PM