I agree with both points, depending on the context; although, I would caution against phrases like, "majority of cases" unless you have the data to support such a claim.

These are responsible rules for graphs aimed towards the general public. However these are not good rules to follow in, for example, scientific literature. Hence, the context and intent of a graph is also important.

Definitely! Especially with mixed charts (bar and line) or two different units (e.g. price and quantity).

But they're not terribly common.

And Canada hasn't a small population. Its just not big compared to its size.

I never claimed I was or was not the subject of your comment, nor was I clarifying what the subject of your comment was.

That's not misleading, just wrong.

Fox News has posted some infamous bar graphs

You are right.

A lot of times I see people manipulating results to align with what leaders want in an effort to look good.

It is full of disconnected dots.

Shame on South America for not achieving anything in ten years!

/s

Those rights aren’t typical for the Fortune 500. Usually found in public former startups like Facebook with powerful founders or investors-turned-owners. Certain rights associated with preferred stock etc. certainly exists but what you’ll see with voting power at Facebook is far and away the exception to the rule.

>For example, if Europe has 21% renewables in 2010 and 48% renewables in 2020, that's a difference of 27 percentage points and an increase of 229 percent.

2020 is 229% of 2010, which is an increase of 129%.

I like it.. informative and helpful.

and they are all way less than what Elon Musk paid for Twitter

I made a seperate comment explaining the idea of the infographic, and yes sometimes it is OK to do it but

#1 is for me the most common way people lie and its not ok in majority of cases.

#2 I would say its only ok for correlation but even here it can mislead users.

#3 maybe there is a better example, the idea is that users should know the full story.

I remember when I did debate as a freshman in high school and hated it because it was all about doing exactly this, as well as censoring lines from documents that didn't agree with your stance and using them. And then when you actually got to debating it was just who could say "nope that's wrong" more convincingly (read: louder and more angrily). Little did I know that's what the world is like

🔥Thank you for clarifying that you were not the subject of my comment…

[removed]

This isn’t a data visualization, it’s an infographic. There’s no data here.

The purpose of the infographic is to show some common examples on how charts can be misleading and on what should readers pay attention to.

Yes, there are cases where this is appropriate but more commonly it is just bad design OR (and this is my main point I want to address) sometimes charts are designed like this on purpose in order to mislead users deliberately.

Common population does not possess statistical literacy to read and interpret numbers accurately. Politicians, for example, love to abuse that by showing charts like these. I wanted to present how they commonly do it.

I've seen a lot of charts in my time but never seen a double y-axis. Is that a thing?

Good point, PNC should add that expense

This is so important. A lot of these things are only problematic because most normal people don’t know how to read graphs. But some are bad for all audiences.

One I have seen occasionally that truly shocks me is non-linear labeling of numbers on an axis—for example, 2, 4, 8, 10, 14, 16, 20. With equal space between each given number.

Who benefits from the analysis and the persuasion presented?

What data are omitted?

Those are the most important questions to answer first. With those ideas in mind, the obvious flaws in the presentation are glaring.

Drumbo trashed me!!