« Light entertainment: March Madness and Wheel of Fortune | Main | First ask the right question: the data scientist edition »


daniel l

I, for one, appreciate election season for it's overall tendency to generate some of the most hilariously bad and some of the most excellent charts we get to see. Trump - he has the best charts. :)

Just to be honest, I'm not a huge fan of either of these examples. The first is too simple to really tell me anything. The second gives me a little cognitive indigestion and I'm not certain that even after thinking through the question it's answering that the return is worth it. Maybe even worse, I think this chart at fivethirtyeight http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/facebook-primary/ is even more difficult to chew, despite the underlying data being at least interesting in concept. FWIW, if you poke around their election area, I think they did an outstanding job on some of the other charts.

Overall, the "election map" concept is neat, but intellectually I (we, I'd think) know that the underlying drivers have more to do with age, race, income, education level, % urban v. % rural living than geography - so why use a map for this anyhow? Aren't we actually obfuscating the bigger factors by hiding them under a map?

daniel l

I should add:

I just very recently got some pretty slick software that, after an analysis that is very geographically sensitive, generates some maps. A lot of whiz bang - but I'm finding that the map fundamentally adds very little to presenting the results and that's even under analytical conditions where the geography heavily factors into the output.

I guess it's possible I'm just mentally blocked on maps in general.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Kaiser Fung. Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker.
Visit my website. Follow my Twitter. See my articles at Daily Beast, 538, HBR.

See my Youtube and Flickr.

Book Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read

Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter