A matter of ethics and cartography. The map of the ambassador and the map of the journalist

Instead of being a neutral technical product as is generally believed, geographical maps are the subjective representations of a precise vision of spaces and the holders of performative power. This article uses the example of maps that give different interpretations of the political situation in the Crimea, disputed between Russia and Ukraine, in order to reflect on the plurality of possible cartographies and the reasons giving rise to them. The choices of the two real protagonists of the incident being described, an ambassador and a journalist, express two different ways of interpreting maps. Continually disputed between those wanting it for the synthetic description and those using it for an analytical interpretation and those evaluating it for its legal value, maps are thus epistemologically uncertain and ethically delicate objects.