As the global map below indicates the differences seem to be primarily based on language with English speaking countries (U.S., Canada, the U.K. Australia and New Zealand) where references to poverty dominate.
Global Map of Slum, Ghetto, and Poverty
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b2366/b2366a2d4f17b90a9d64e9f1259692db23a3639b" alt=""
European Map of Slum, Ghetto, and Poverty
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/288ea/288ea8dfd34876a85b9c2e884d31e3bc52170796" alt=""
Looking at North America therefore is helpful as it represents largely English speaking (apologies to Quebec and Mexico). While it is clear that there are more mentions of poverty than either slum or ghetto there are some intriguing patterns.
For example, places where references to slum are the most prevalent are relatively rare but do seem to correspond with poor areas such as Watts in Los Angeles and some neighborhoods in Philadelphia and New York. The term ghetto also appears to be most frequent in urban settings (although not all) with the cities of Tampa, Gainesville, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Phoenix, Oakland and Sacramento representing clusters.
Since the term poverty greatly overshadows occurrences of slum or ghetto we also generated a map which just those terms. It is not clear why these differences are here but may simple point to regional linguist preferences with the U.S.
North American Map of Slum and Ghetto
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c27e9/c27e92146b187bcc57014bc97923af6a84f4afe7" alt=""
[1] Which of course bring up its own problems in the city of Paris and the Hilton Hotel. Maybe we should try Nicole Richie instead?
Why is it not Showing Bombay or India?
ReplyDelete