Skip to main content

Home/ contemporary issues in public policy/ Questions on Chart Wars: The Political Power of Data Visualization
Joshua Gray

Questions on Chart Wars: The Political Power of Data Visualization - 16 views

started by Joshua Gray on 10 Oct 11
  • Joshua Gray
    #1 Joshua Gray on 10 Oct 11
     
    In this article the author points out how visual representations like the one created by Bohner's office are often made to intentionally mislead the American public about certain issues. Even though it may be misleading, do you believe it is fair to do in politics keeping in mind that the information is not being forced upon anyone and freely given? Would you be willing to manipulate numbers and charts to fool the public at large into believeing a cause that you felt strongly about?
  • Mike Frieda
    #2 Mike Frieda on 11 Oct 11
     
    I think the key word here is "fool". I think it is debatable whether or not overly complex visuals are 'fooling' individuals, so much as overly simplified visuals would. However, if we got back to the question of rational actions, we can see that such visuals would not be consumed properly by the citizenry, and I therefore believe that in effect these visuals are a danger to the flow of free information. I do not see any objective reason why a politician should not be able to make convoluted arguments and visuals, or any other form of visual which is intentionally misleading, but I can see the dilemma it presents. In a democratic society, if we are to allow manipulation of information to such an extent that the lines of facts become blurred, than it is inherent that the democratic system will falter. A chart like the one Bohner made is grossly propagandist, and aims to further political objectives while disseminating false information. Less egregious examples could potentially be acceptable, and I think any of us would use certain methodologies in order to further a cause to which we are passionate (We've all changed the margins and increased the font size before, so changing the shape on a pie chart to appear more impressive would seem logical).
  • Felecia Russell
    #3 Felecia Russell on 12 Oct 11
     
    I think the information is not misleading in itself, but the presentation of the information is misleading. This is what politics is all about. The majority of American people do not understand the complex issues of politics and so it is someone's job to simplify the visuals and the the content. Any of us would use certain methods to persuade people on issues we care deeply about. It is not necessarliy manipulating, but more "dumbing down" the information. It is unfortunate, but that is whats happening. I would like to think if i was a politician, my passions would apply to certain people and to reach out to others i would have to manipulate the information a tad bit, but it would not be manipulating people's thinking. I would be a good politician :)
  • Jonathan Omokawa
    #4 Jonathan Omokawa on 12 Oct 11
     
    The more I think about it, the more that I realize how the average person is not a "good citizen". Pericles from History of the Peloponnesian War said that a person is not a citizen unless they are well informed of the nations goings ons. It is the responsibility of the citizen to know all the ins and outs of a policy they are voting on. Arguments that say that its not the citizens problem are the reasons why the government has so much control of our everyday lives. Its the reason why people who blame McDonalds for being overweight win their cases. There is no accountability in this country anymore. Plus, democracies are not about finding the truth, its about who orates the better speech.
  • Eric Henderson
    #5 Eric Henderson on 12 Oct 11
     
    I guess fair is the right word to use in this situation, as the public really does not have to believe everything that politicians say are true. I think a better word would be is it right? and the obvious answer to that is no because then it may mislead someone to think they are voting for or believing in one policy, even though their true beliefs lie in another. On the other hand though, if i did feel strongly about an issue, I would most definitely manipulate data to mislead the public into following my beliefs.
  • Mitchell Burris
    #6 Mitchell Burris on 12 Oct 11
     
    I would not feel comfortable intentionally misleading people to get them to comply to my will in politics or otherwise. I would rather present open easily understandable statistics, facts, and/or arguments to persuade people to my position. That being said I don't think that it is "unfair" in the traditional sense to provide potentially misleading data be it that the consumer doesn't' know the full context or what have you. Obviously, however, as I said before I would much prefer a world in which everything was honest and clear cut but since this is the political climate that exists I don't think it is unfair for campaigners to utilize a common method. If anything it is unfair to us, the consumers of the data.
  • Mangala Kanayson
    #7 Mangala Kanayson on 04 Dec 11
     
    I think if your argument is strong enough, you should not have to fool people into believing your opinion. I don't agree that prevalence of a thing equals morality. If I could not convince anyone of my "strongly held opinion" through logic and rationality, I would begin questioning the validity of that opinion. I think strongly held opinions are dangerous and prevent people from engaging in constructive and critical discourse. I know it's a utopian perspective, but I think transparency is important and that the presentation of information should be done as honestly as possible especially when it has far-reaching implications that can change an entire nation.

To Top

Start a New Topic » « Back to the contemporary issues in public policy group