When the Globe is the Problem
How a U.S. tech company partners with an American adversary to smuggle propaganda into the classroom
I love maps. Maps tell you how to get places. They teach you what is “here,” versus what is “there.” When I was in high school, I printed out a map from Google to instruct me turn-by-turn on how to pick up my prom date at her house. Now as an adult, I’m quite literally dependent on digital maps. When I lived in Boston, I followed my GPS to work for literally three years before I realized that I couldn’t navigate there without it. Maps seem like cold, objective statements of fact: a road or a river either exists or it doesn’t. And it is that perception—that maps are an innocuous, verifiable reality—that make them so rife for deception. If you control what is shown on a map, you are literally projecting a worldview of what countries do and don’t exist, and to whom certain territory belongs, and where disputed borders are drawn. As I’ve traveled, I’ve noticed many examples of this and I’ll describe some of them. But the basis for this essay is something different entirely: it’s an experiment.
In short: I bought the top three globes on Amazon1 when using the search term “globe for kids” and then meticulously studied them to see what they taught.
When I set out to write this essay, I imagined I’d make a table contrasting the differing territorial claims from the three different globes. However, when the globes arrived and I began to study them, I was struck that the contentious claims were all identical. In fact, two of three globes were exactly identical, just sold under different brand listings on Amazon. The listed brand of one of the globes (“Rrshnsgv”) seems to be made up gibberish and was identical to the globe branded by “VAP.” However, it was the third globe from “the Waldauge Store” that was awarded the prized “Amazon’s Choice,” and it did feel higher quality with a glossy finish and additional details that the two twin globes lacked.
So, what is the country of origin of these three top-listed “globes for kids” with perfect doctrinal territorial consistency and one of which is promoted as “Amazon’s Choice”? I was curious too, but alas Amazon does not list where their products are made. Such a policy is perhaps defensible when you are buying tube socks or an anime figurine. But globes—moreover globes intended to teach children—are quite sensitive, as the geopolitical worldview of the country where the globe is made may differ considerably from where the customer lives.
The country these three globes were made in, of course, was China. China is a manufacturing powerhouse and has some of the most efficient, innovative, and productive factories in the world. America, and the world, has benefitted immensely from China’s manufacturing prowess, effectively giving a raise to families worldwide by making quality products that are more affordable than competitors. Yet, as we all learned during the coronavirus pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: some goods are too sensitive for overseas production. No country should feel secure if their face masks, gasoline, or ammunition are being monopolized by another country, let alone a revisionist adversary.
But before considering the implications of outsourcing childhood educational material to China, let’s look at the claims made by these three globes. Again, the claims between the three globes are consistent and identical, which makes sense given China’s rigorous enforcement of its “official” map, both at home and overseas.
All the maps include Taiwan as part of China. In fact, they don’t even call the country “Taiwan,” instead opting for “Taiwan Tao” (台湾岛) meaning “Taiwan Island,” and mirroring the name for “Hainan Dao” (an island actually part of China). Similarly, “Tiaoyu Tao” is the Chinese name for the Senkaku Islands, which in reality are administered by Japan. The uninhabited Senkakus are so tiny, that their inclusion on a 6-inch globe for children can only be explained by rigid adherence to doctrinal propaganda. Tibet is missing from the globe despite being more than 100,000x the size of the Senkakus.
The maps all contain China’s infamous “Nine Dash Line,” which is a swooping territorial claim to nearly all of the South China Sea including islands and waters claimed (and variably administered) by eight other countries. In fact, a UN tribunal ruled in the Philippines’ favor when arbitration was brought against China’s “Nine Dash Line” claim to Philippine islands. The western border of China on each globe also includes bits of territory controlled by India, like Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh.
Outside of China’s own territorial claims, the three globes make consistent assertions that ranged from revisionist to, at best, dubious or incomplete. A list of what I noticed:
The capital of Ukraine is spelled the Russian “Kiev” instead of the Ukrainian “Kyiv.”
Kosovo simply ceases to exist on the map as a country at all, instead disappearing into Serbia.2
Kashmir is shown as separate from either India or Pakistan with a different color and dashed-line border (it is currently divided and administered by India and Pakistan)
Falkland Islands are listed as “Claimed by Arg & U.K.” (they are currently administered as a British Overseas Territory)
Israel and Palestine are both listed over an undivided territory that is in fact the combination of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. No capital is listed for either, and Israel is shown to not include the Golan Heights territory that it administers and is disputed by Syria (and most other countries)
The Kuril Islands, some of which are claimed by Japan, are all granted to Russia (Russia currently administers these islands). The point is driven home by a sharp dividing dash between Japan and their claimed islands… a distinction that must be quite important to the map makers!
This is an incomplete list of contentious or revisionist assertions on these globes, but the point isn’t about enumerating each, but instead about how America is permitting another country (that happens to be an adversary) to direct the geopolitical education of its children. I generally agree with the perspective that China punches well below its weight when it comes to exporting its soft power (e.g., Noah Smith described: “its artistic and cultural influence is practically nil”), while smaller open societies like Korea and Japan are able to evangelize their culture abroad with pop music, movies, and soap operas. However, what this perspective misses is how China is able to leverage its manufacturing prowess and giant domestic markets to export its worldview regardless of its absence in global pop culture.
And, consider that my story of the three globes is emblematic of the numerous P.R.C. influence campaigns, which frequently rely on a willing U.S. tech partner. Amazon, a U.S. tech giant, is vital to China’s successful propagandizing of cheap globes to American kids. It doesn’t display the country of origin for their products, it labels globes displaying revisionist propaganda as “Amazon’s Choice,” and ranks them in all the highest spots when searching. And admittedly, the globes are good quality and remarkably cheap—so likely a lot of Amazon customers who don’t care about geopolitics are very satisfied with their purchases.
Many American tech giants are enablers of Beijing’s propaganda, whether it is the “spamouflage” operation on Twitter/X, Apple removing Taiwan’s flag emoji from domestic Chinese iPhones, or even Google Maps itself. And, despite the impressive doctrinal obedience of these tech companies and their willingness to propagandize for profit, none (with the exception of Apple) are even accessible within China. Twitter is banned, TikTok is banned, Google is banned… even Google Translate is banned. Thus, it is the desire for domestic American profit paired with the evanescent promise of a giant Chinese market that is sufficient to produce the doctrinal obedience (or at least placation) on display by Twitter/X owner Elon Musk, Google, Apple, Amazon and beyond.
While I disagree with many of the claims made on these globes, I actually agree with others (like Syria’s claim to the Golan Heights, or the status of Kashmir). And, I continue to believe that Americans (and the world generally) benefits from the globalization and supply chain specialization that led to the rise of China. But there are limits: the unfortunate pairing between the profit motivation of companies in free countries and the revisionism of an ascendent country with formidable manufacturing results in a loss of the educational sovereignty owed to countries themselves, their localities, and the families living there. Countries need to develop a thoughtful approach to which goods are appropriate for overseas production and which are just too sensitive. And, tech companies must consider values besides profit when operating in these sensitive domains.
The top three globes ranked by Amazon on 1/29/24 when searching “Globes for Kids,” excluding the upsold electronic globes that need to be plugged in.
Kosovo, for the unfamiliar, is a country that claimed independence years after a 1990s NATO intervention that prevented the genocide of ethnic Albanians Muslims by the Serbs. The United States and over 100 other U.N. member countries recognize Kosovo’s independence, but China does not.