MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
National Geographic apologizes for publishing Malvinas pictures as from the Falklands
National Geographic has apologized to Tierra del Fuego governor Rosana Bertone for publishing in Instagram pictures identified as taken in the Falklands, instead of the Malvinas Islands. According to Ushuaia reports, aware of this situation, the Environment Secretary of Tierra del Fuego Mauro Pérez Toscani, on instructions from Ms Bertone addressed the National Geographic Foundation to express disappointment and demaning rectification of the Malvinas controversy. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesEscude´explained that the intensification of ''territorial indoctrination'' had a snowball effect. It began in 1947 and by 1979 Argentinians were already mentally conditioned to go to war, if necessary to protect a particular image of the national territory. The image taught to two generations of Argentinians was that the national territory was composed of two parts: ''the continental territory'' and the ''imaginary territory'' and the imaginary territory made up of the ''Antarctic region'' and the ''ocean islands''.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 10:58 am - Link - Report abuse +3Falklands - Argentina's Imaginary Territory (1 pg):- https://www.academia.edu/35715281/Falklands_Argentinas_Imaginary_Territory
If the national geographic can't even get the name right, I doubt I'll bother buying another.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 11:49 am - Link - Report abuse +7And now we must demand an apology for them apologising when they got it right in the first place.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 12:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +7They lost the right to say Malvinas as they were defeated in battle ,so the name remains the FALKLANDS. These Yanks can't keep up, they are so up their own arse.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 12:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +5You can see what it is all about. National Geographic are visiting Tierra del Fuego and Islas Estados in February. I would imagine that unless they played ball with the idiots down there, that the trip would be cancelled. I would say that the “apology” was pragmatic.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 01:15 pm - Link - Report abuse +7If the team wish to research in the Falklands again, they can apply to the Malvinas and see where that gets them.
What a shame. Typical of the greasy and sneaky Argies to ruin everything.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 01:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +5Anybody would think that Enric Sala had his own axe to grind...oh wait a minute, he's Spanish.................................
Feb 09th, 2018 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +3I hope FIG stop them publishing these photos
Feb 09th, 2018 - 02:09 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Did this even happen? I can't find it mentioned anywhere else but their website has plenty of articles about the Falklands: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/02/falkland-islands/
Feb 09th, 2018 - 03:05 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Also the headline makes it sound weirdly like they are two different places...
This is a game which we shouldn't play, in Spanish it is Malvinas, in English it is Falklands, nothing to do with sovereignty.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 04:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +2This is very important just like England and Inglaterra or Canal de la Mancha and English Channel
The name in Spanish is ALWAYS going to be Malvinas and we must accept that an this has nothing at all to do with sovereignty. The name in English HAS to be Falklands and that has nothing to do with sovereignty.
To be fair, Argentina can't get anything right - where their war dead are buried, the name of the capital or even the proper name according to ISO 3166 of the Falkland Islands. It's a shame that Nat Geo pander to these idiots.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 06:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Oh, if it's just what they call it in Spanish then that seems like a fair enough policy.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Mr. Fitz Roy..., my dear Kelper...
Feb 09th, 2018 - 08:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -3Just for your kind info...:
- The proper name according to ISO 3166 of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) is...:
*** ”Falkland Islands (Malvinas)” ***
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1
Chuckle..., chuckle...
Not, it's not correct to say the Islas Malvinas are how the Falkland Islands are called “in Spanish.”
Feb 09th, 2018 - 08:16 pm - Link - Report abuse -5Publications and maps have both titles as a way to state Argentina's ongoing claim to the Islas Malvinas (Falkland Islands), which is what the National Geographic should have done in the first place.
Livepeanuts. Don't be ridiculous. I'm sure that some kind soul like Brit Bob will send you a link to a map in Spanish that refers to the islands as the Falkland Islands.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +5Anyhow, my boycott of the 21st Century Fox Group, that owns National Geographic, starts now!
National Geographic is a magazine published in the English (or perhaps American) language. It should of course use the name Falkland Islands. But there are also editions in other languages, even in Swedish. In the Swedish edition the islands should be called Falklandsöarna, which is the name used in Sweden. The Spanish edition could of course use the name Islas Malvinas, as it is commonly used in that language and has a long tradition. However, unfortunately, the Argentine claim makes this name offensive to most islanders. But names like “Puerto Argentino”, invented by the military junta in 1982, should never be used in any language what so ever.
Feb 09th, 2018 - 11:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +7Where is National Geographic based? in Nieuw Amsterdam on the bank of Río de San Antonio in EastAmerigo?
Feb 09th, 2018 - 11:50 pm - Link - Report abuse +2I do hope that both the Falkland and the UK government send them a message.
The Spanish name would correctly be Islas Falkland. The M word is a bastardisation of “iles malouines” which the dirty argies copied from the French, as they were lacking the imagination to invent their own original name and lacking the history to justify it.
Feb 10th, 2018 - 12:03 am - Link - Report abuse +9@EM
Feb 10th, 2018 - 02:46 am - Link - Report abuse +1Some do, yeah, but that could get a little lengthy if you did it all the time. Using Malvinas in English or Islas Falkland in Spanish is definitely pushing a political view though, while the reverse is not true. And I agree with Swede about the names invented by the military Junta.
Thank you National Geographic for the correction.
Feb 10th, 2018 - 07:24 am - Link - Report abuse -7As I said,it is just a pragmatic solution to enable them to work in Islas Estados.
Feb 10th, 2018 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse +6If they really meant that they recognised the Falklands as Argentinian, then they would have recalled the copies of their current issue (Feb.2018) and pulped them issuing an apology to the morons in Tierra del Fuego...but they didn't. These are the same low-lives that tried to kill the Top Gear camera teams.
In their article, they show a map which names the islands thus, acknowledging that they are UK territory.
FALKLAND ISLANDS
(ISLAS MALVINAS)
(U.K.)
People like Marcos and Think will jump at anything sensing a major victory when it's just a
storm in a teacup.
If you watched Blue Planet 11 I don't think you heard the Falklands being referred to as the Malvinas and this is a program that has been shown world-wide. Have there been any attempts to ban its showing ?
Likewise do any cruise companies visit the Malvinas ?
This, too, shall pass.The albatross does not discriminate; it is not a political animal.
Feb 10th, 2018 - 11:53 am - Link - Report abuse +1TWIMC...
Feb 10th, 2018 - 02:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -8Names are important...
The Colonials know that well...
How many of you lads rermember...:
Basutoland...?
Bechuanaland...?
Biafra...?
Nyasaland...?
Rhodesia...?
Togoland...?
Zanzibar...?
That is exactly the point, it's such a colonialist mindset to turn up in a town and give it your own name, not caring what the people who live there and built the place call it. The fact Argentina still uses the name shows exactly how much they'd respect the inhabitants' cultural differences if they had control.
Feb 10th, 2018 - 03:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Mr.DemonTree...
Feb 10th, 2018 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse -6Inhabitants...?
Ya mean them Kelper squatters installed by Engrish colonial cannon boat brute force in 1833..., laddie...?
You said you favoured an Åland solution. Surely that would not include renaming their town without even consulting them? Or should we be talking about an Ahvenanmaa solution instead?
Feb 10th, 2018 - 04:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who said nothing about renaming no hamlets...
Feb 10th, 2018 - 05:09 pm - Link - Report abuse -5Malvinas/Falklands is a nice name...
And Puerto Estanley may remain Puerto Estanley....
No sweat...
Hah, so you do agree. Shame your government doesn't, it would be more meaningful than sending (Peruvian?) teddy bears.
Feb 10th, 2018 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Think
Feb 10th, 2018 - 05:36 pm - Link - Report abuse +7Names are important...
The Colonials know that well...
Yes, that's why it is called the Falklands.
”Installed by Engrish ..( British ...there was no English navy from the early 18th century ) colonial cannon boat brute force in 1833..”
Try spell checker.... you will find that the word is spelled ENGLISH. Glad to be of help when you get things wrong
....as opposed to the Argentinian brutes who invaded and occupied the Islands with massive military force backed up by Amtracs, naval vessels and air power. Were any people shot at or cannon fire used to evict the Argie squatters in 1833.
Zanzibar...still called this although part of Tanzania.
Your point is that these countries used be known by these names until they changed on gaining independence. They have been known as the Falklands and Malvinas BUT as they are a UK BOT the correct name, as also agreed by the inhabitants is...FALKLANDS.
I hope this clears up your misunderstanding of the position....FALKLANDS !
I was looking up the google maps names in Spanish. My favourite is Rincón Grande, know in English as... Rincon Grande. There's also Puerto San Carlos = Port San Carlos, and Puerto Esteban = Port Stephen. For some reason Fitzroy is Fitz Roy in the Spanish version. Google don't seem convinced about Puerto Argentino either, they've got Stanley written after it which they haven't done for any other location.
Feb 10th, 2018 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse -1@Clyde15
Biafra is a part of Nigeria that declared independence and fought a bloody civil war but was ultimately unable to win it, I think. So maybe Think's point is that having lost the war for independence, they don't get to call themselves the Republic of Biafra any more?
I guess it was the easiest solution, but keeping the arbitrary borders drawn up by the colonial powers in Africa and the Middle East has caused all sorts of problems. In Europe they were redrawn along ethnic and linguistic lines after the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which probably helped create more cohesive and workable countries.
@DT
Feb 10th, 2018 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The kingdom of Biafra existed centuries before Nigeria became a country. The war which the Ibos waged against the Federal government in 1967 was lost in 1970 when the newly formed “Republic of Biafra” was reincorporated into Nigeria. You might recall I recommended the reading of Frederick Forsythe's book on the war. An eye-opener.
I visited the city of Onitsha - which I believe was Biafra's capital - 8 years after the war ended, and with the exception of a few places, it looked liked the war had ended yesterday.
@JB
Feb 10th, 2018 - 11:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Yes, I remember. You're the reason I've even heard of the place. If it existed before Nigeria was colonised, it makes even less sense to insist on the colonial borders. Countries aren't just arbitrary pieces of land, but should reflect a people with some kind of common idea of who they are. Otherwise what is the point of having them?
Nothing of importance happened in 1833 Think, merely the ejection of a few Argie trespassers who had ignored the warnings. A small police action, and the police sailed away ... possibly with blue lights flashing.
Feb 11th, 2018 - 02:09 am - Link - Report abuse +6Of no consequence.
@ Think
Feb 11th, 2018 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse +5“Inhabitants...?
Ya mean them Kelper squatters installed by Engrish colonial cannon boat brute force in 1833..., ”
Ya mean the 11 squatters from BA, the 4 squatters from Uruguay, and the other squatters from France, Jamaica, Ireland, and Germany?
And that fine example of British Overseas aid from Mr Onslow to those Gaucho Falklanders when they'd got Jack Squit from Vernet.
Ohh do I hear someone say?Just like now in the 21st century, the British pay, the Argentines get away (with theft).
And so nice of Mr Vernet to have slaves, who were freed on that fine summer's day by Mr Onslow.
Shades of 1982 as the United Provinces forces display a massive cock up, with more forces than HMS Clio,(More Argentine forces than Brits in 1982, how history repeats), but how sad,what a pity, never mind,that many UP 'soldiers'were in irons, some released from arrest (for mutiny) in the vain hope they would resist the Brits. And the icing on the cake? 50 plus odd British sailors crewing the Sarandi who for some unexplained reason didn't want to fight other British sailors.
Wonder why?
Same cock ups in 1833 from an illegal force, on the Falklands for only three months and fast forward to 1982 when another illegal force, this time showing slightly more resistance, again only lasting three months, using very few Brits except a scouser at Goose Green and a few 'Welsh' Argentines.
And the really funny part? That all those good ol farmer boys from BA refused to fight the Brits and instead with the final insult to the UPs, chose to stay under the good old Union Jack.
A small point.
Feb 11th, 2018 - 11:09 pm - Link - Report abuse +3Only 3 of Vernet's indentured slaves were still there in 1833. Vernet had taken his household slaves with him when he left on the Harriet in 1831 leading some American commentators to believe that it was not his intention to return to the Islands. Silas Duncan in the Lexington took off all the rest that he could find ( the 3 had gone into hiding). On Duncan's return to Montevideo, he handed the slaves over to the local authorities who arranged to have them returned to Vernet - bar one, who appears to have slipped away before the Port authority turned up.
England will return the Malvinas within 25 years.
Feb 14th, 2018 - 05:38 am - Link - Report abuse -5Cannot return anything you have never, ever owned. As you post the same meaningless sentence everywhere I am convinced you are a robot, devoid of any brain power.
Feb 15th, 2018 - 11:09 am - Link - Report abuse +2Mr. Phil H...
Feb 15th, 2018 - 11:13 am - Link - Report abuse -4And how much brainpower does one that responds to a robot devoid of any brain power have...?
@RL
Feb 15th, 2018 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse +6Thanks for the correction.
If the following information is in the timeline, my apologies for not reading it thoroughly enough.
Who was the third indented slave?
@DemonTree
That is exactly the point, it's such a colonialist mindset to turn up in a town and give it your own name.
Oh the irony......Well pointed out.
And indeed,' colonial' implies that the occupying power runs a territory from a distance, without a government run by people living or born on the territory.
So the assertion that the Falkland Islands are 'colonially' run is farcical.
Yet the very people that imply this are 'colonial' in their own mindset, as exemplified by the Argentine assertion that Bertone runs the Falklands,when she has never turned up.
@Think
“Ya mean them Kelper squatters”
Who were?
As you claim to possess superior intellect over all who post here, you can therefore verify how many of the British sailors serving under Pinedo on the Sarandi, (out of the 57 or so) were born in England.
These sailors formed a substantial proportion of the settler/land based military/Sarandi naval personnel present (3/1/1833), so rather than a large influx of British settlers/military personnel from HMS Clio, (as alluded by Argentina), it would appear that a large number of British folks in fact left, rather than arrived?
To all:
As these British sailors refused to fight, but were technically working for the UPs, is it time that the Argentine Government issued them posthumously with medals?
PB - the only name ever recorded was 'Black John'
Feb 15th, 2018 - 02:39 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@RL Cheers, 1833 just got more interesting.
Feb 17th, 2018 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!