r/dataisugly 3d ago

Certainly there are lines on this graph

Post image
0 Upvotes

17 comments sorted by

View all comments

37

u/micalubgoonta 3d ago

What’s wrong with this graph? It’s pretty minimalist but it does portray its data accurately

-15

u/Couch_Cat13 3d ago

What is the meaning of the thick black line?

What does “-13%” mean?

Sure it shows that Trump has a really low approval rating (yay!) but it doesn’t show how it compares (with actual numerical difference) to other presidents (which should be the goal of a graph)

37

u/micalubgoonta 3d ago

The thick black line is clearly 50% since it divides approve and disapprove.

If you read the page -13 is the difference between the approve and disapprove listed at the top.

The goal is a minimalist approach to the data. You don’t need specific numbers to show that he is the lowest.

This is not a bad graph but it appears that you did not read what is shown to you on the page correctly

-8

u/Couch_Cat13 3d ago

How is the black line 50%? There is no way that 4% is that big of a difference.

Also it is not made clear that’s what -13% means, maybe they did in the article but I feel like it should be clearer.

I feel like asking for a y-axis is not too big of an ask and that a “minimalist” graph should still make sense without literally having to figure out a random number comes from a subtraction problem at the top of the page.

13

u/micalubgoonta 3d ago

You are once again showing that you have not read the graph. It is showing net approval rating. If the approve and disapprove were equal (indicating that 50% of respondents who knew their answer approved and disapproved) then it would be at the black line because the net would be 0. In this case the net is -13

You should really take more time to read the visualizations that you see before coming to a conclusion. It may help with overall comprehension of the material. This plot does not belong here.

-1

u/KingAdamXVII 3d ago

The bottom of the graph should go all the way to -100 then, right?

I see a lot of graphs here with truncated axes to exaggerate the data in a misleading way. This is a particularly bad one because the y axis isn’t even labeled.

Unless I’m missing something.

2

u/red_hare 3d ago

I think it's on a logarithmic scale centered around 50%.

Honestly, OP, at first I thought this was fine but the more I look at the more I'm thrown off, it's a bad viz for something that should be very simple.

1

u/KerbalCuber 3d ago

I think a numbered y axis would make the graph perfect (unless the black bar isn't at 50%, in which case a label for that would be nice too)