Scrolling through my Twitter feed this morning, I came across this:
The way the data are displayed makes it unnecessarily difficult to draw the conclusion asserted in that post. There’s a lot going on here, with colors and other features of the chart competing for our attention. E.g.,
- What do the different colors mean? Is it significant that 2 columns are shades of grey and others are colors?
- My eye is immediately drawn to the smallest and tallest columns, which also happen to be near the center, and beside each other. Also, why is that value label (66%) IN the bar while the others are on top?
- Why does the Y-axis just go to 70%?
- Is the total column necessary info?
[If you like, you can read the Foundation’s blog post associated with this data]
I plopped the data into Excel and crafted this revision:
Full disclosure, I am a huge fan of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, and it is (easily) arguable that advocacy for child and family issues would not be what it is without their Kids Count data. But in this particular case, the design of the graph they created does not help make the point they wish to make.
*From a framing perspective, I also question why it was deemed valuable to share these data in this way. By calling attention to the low number of single-parent immigrant families (implicitly suggesting that’s a good thing), do these data inadvertently reinforce negative cultural stereotypes about single-parent families?
Do the data reinforce stereotypes about racial and ethnic groups also portrayed here?
Those are important questions to ask when presenting data. It’s also important to consider whether these kinds of data presentations, by triggering stereotypes, make the conversation we should be having more difficult to have. Namely, with over 1/3 of all US children living in single-parent families, how well are policies and programs responding to the reality of life for families today?
FramingGPS™ is my new smartphone app. Yeehaw!
In the course of my work (which tends to require sending framing memos, message material and slide presentations via e-mail or Dropbox) it has become clear that advocates and issue experts need their messages where they do their work – at their desks, in meetings, when talking to reporters, when catching a legislator in the hall.
Given that most of my clients advance their work in coalitions, it is also imperative to ensure ALL people who are communicating publicly are “on message.” This tends not to happen when somebody didn’t get the framing memo.
I developed FramingGPS™ to respond to these varied communication contexts that ARE the office-spaces of front-line advocates.
Check it out! (ya know, by clicking on any instance of FramingGPS™ in this post. :))
And let me know what you think!
I’ve compiled a list of free stock photo and icon sites that have images appropriate for social issue advocates. It’s hard to find interesting and high quality stock photos for free, so bookmark these!
- Unsplash – Gorgeous, hi-res photos. Some highly conceptual. I love these because most are evocative of ideas.
- StockSnap – Just as the site says – beautiful free photos. I’m working on some transportation issues for a client so searched “transportation” and found 194 images.
- Negative Space – You’ll see a list of category names (landscape, people, business, etc.) along the left side of the page. If you use the search function and the site doesn’t have anything, it will search Shutterstock for you, which is a paid site.
Both of these sites are terrific, and have tens of thousands of free icons. The free downloads require an attribution, and each site explains their very simple attribution guidelines. To get royalty free versions, you can sign up for a monthly membership, currently at $9.99 on either site, that you can cancel any time.
- Flat Icon – I LOVE this site. Need a map icon? A ruler? A dollar sign? A gear? A thumbs up? You get my drift. Thousands of wonderful icons.
- Noun Project – Here you can also download icons, and must give credit to the author if you download free versions. You can pay $1.99 to purchase royalty free versions.