Content deleted Content added
Two implications |
→Overview: rm inappropraite wiki-hosted lecture-notes (which only appear to be sourcing the sentence fragment "By the mid-20th century, cartographers") |
||
Line 2:
== Overview ==
By the mid-20th century, cartographers
One of the implications of this communication model<ref name="CC08"> Richard Donohue (2008). [http://geographer.situatedlaboratories.org/critical_cartography.php Critical cartography]. Retrieved 3 September 2008. </ref> is a clear separation between [[cartographer]] and user, whereby the map was seen simply as an “intermediary between the cartographer and the user”.<ref name="JWC01"/> endorsed an “epistemic break” that shifted our understandings of maps as communication systems to investigating them in terms of fields of power relations and exploring the “mapping environments in which knowledge is constructed”.<ref name="JWC01"/> This involved examining the social contexts in which maps were both produced and used, a departure from simply seeing maps as artifacts to be understood apart from this context.<ref name="CC08"/>
A second implication of this model<ref name="CC08"/> is the presumption inherited from [[positivism]] that it is possible to separate facts from values. As Harley stated: Maps are never value-free images; except in the narrowest Euclidean sense they are not in themselves either true or false. Both in the selectivity of their content and in their signs and styles of representation maps are a way of conceiving, articulating, and structuring the human world which is biased towards, promoted by, and exerts influence upon particular sets of social relations. By accepting such premises it becomes easier to see how appropriate they are to manipulation by the powerful in society.<ref name="CC08"/>
== History ==
|