This talk addresses the question of what is meant by geographical literacy in the U.S., and the implications for how the subject is defined, both within U.S. borders and outside of them. Tests that purport to measure geographical literacy raise questions about relationships between university geography and what are assumed by many to be a geographically il-literate American public. I offer examples of the many close linkages that indeed exist and have existed historically – for better and worse – between university geography and many publics. Moreover, literate or other kinds of publics do not pre-exist discourse – they are brought into being and formed through it. Thus, associated with various geographical (il)literacies are various publics that exist or might be brought into being by various studies, actors, policies, or events. How we define geographical literacy carries significant consequences, particularly since arguments for tackling illiteracy are often associated with particular “pro-American” narratives and ambitions. Many who fret over geographical illiteracy appear mostly concerned that the U.S. retain a dominant global position, and argue that a return to education in regional or area studies geography will help ensure it.