I'm a little concerned with the lack of any absolute numbers in the data visualisations in this article. The 'more/less' and 'higher/lower' bars could be very misleading on some of these stats. I can understand that adding numbers can make these visualisations a little more intimidating but is it too much to expect the high/low ranges to have an absolute number on them?
For example in the disposal income visualisation what kind of magnitude of a difference is there. Is the average 2 thousand euro a year lower or 10 thousand euro a year?
What concerns me is that some of these stats can be massaged with the right visuals into producing a difference between East and West that isn't as big a difference as the graph makes it out to be.
Comments
I'm a little concerned with the lack of any absolute numbers in the data visualisations in this article. The 'more/less' and 'higher/lower' bars could be very misleading on some of these stats. I can understand that adding numbers can make these visualisations a little more intimidating but is it too much to expect the high/low ranges to have an absolute number on them?
For example in the disposal income visualisation what kind of magnitude of a difference is there. Is the average 2 thousand euro a year lower or 10 thousand euro a year?
What concerns me is that some of these stats can be massaged with the right visuals into producing a difference between East and West that isn't as big a difference as the graph makes it out to be.
The original article published in the German newspaper Die Zeit has the graphics with numbers. The article and the graphics are in English. http://zeit.de/feature/german-unification-a-nation-divided
I do not know why the Washington Post removed the numbers in their graphics...
Washington Post is courting the "numbers are a distraction from the story" demographic.