Infographic. highly factual, slightly incomplete

[madd0ct0r]

http://www.infographicsarchive.com/wp-c ... 0x4145.jpg

[Terralthra]

If you made this, I'm embarrassed on your behalf, for calling it "factual," but failing to call it "misleading."

For example, calling our attention to the unemployment rate in 2008...before Obama took office. He was inaugurated in January 2009. It climbed steadily throughout 2008, during Bush's last term in office. From <5.0% in January 2008, it rose to 8.1% by February 2009, the data collected during the ending days of Bush's term. It actually continued to rise, peaking at just under 10% midway through 2009, and has fallen gradually over the last 3 years.

You also compare two different sources for income, raising the obvious question of whether their methodology is similar enough that there aren't other factors affecting the difference.

[Nephtys]

Gas prices doubled since the start of 2009? That's incredibly misleading. The peak of gas prices was back in ~2006, then it dropped, then rose again. And it's not DOUBLED. Currently all of California sees gas at around 4 a gallon to 4.50. In 2009, Gas was NOT 2 dollars.

[Terralthra]

Nephtys - that's another "misleading" bit. See this graph:

As you can see, there was a price crash right around November-December 2009, during which some gas prices fell to below $2.00 per gallon...after the summer of 2008, where gas prices hit a record high $4.11 per gallon. Since the peak and crash of the oil speculation bubble, gas prices have generally risen, in some areas rising back up to near or above the peak, while somewhat below them now.

[SirNitram]

Wow, look at that. A 'Highly factual' graphic that's blatantly misleading. My favorite is the credit rating drop, which the credit rating agencies explicitly called a result of the opposition.. Not Obama.

As for the whole unemployment thing..

[Pint0 Xtreme]

That's the thing - comparing unemployment figures of two different time frames doesn't give us the overall picture of unemployment in the country. It reflects the percentage of people who are actively looking for work. It's not an uncommon occurrence for the unemployment rate to rise when there is a net gain of jobs since it sometimes encourages people who have stopped looking for work to start looking for work again (hence, increasing the number of people being counted in the unemployment rate). Seriously, who created this dishonest, piece of trash?

[Executor32]

An shitty ad agency from Utah that bills itself as 'the agency for the digital revolution', yet has an equally shitty website that doesn't work properly?

[Pint0 Xtreme]

I'd like to add that the part where it says "Are you better off? NOPE." is anything but highly factual. Considering that the economy was in a free fall back in 2008, I'd have to say, yes we are better off. Yes, the economy is still shitty but it is still better than the state of the economy about four years ago.

[Magis]

I really do not understand the recent Republican obsession with food stamp participation. That, in and of itself, is not a valuable indicator of the performance of the economy.

[Rogue 9]

I really do not understand the recent Republican obsession with food stamp participation. That, in and of itself, is not a valuable indicator of the performance of the economy.

But a large portion of their base gets pissed off that their money is being used to feed those they perceive as deadbeats who should just get up and get jobs. So they focus on it because they want the idiots to vote and it's a motivator.

[Irbis]

I really do not understand the recent Republican obsession with food stamp participation. That, in and of itself, is not a valuable indicator of the performance of the economy.

Why? Because it documents the encroaching and transformation to ЦNITED SOЏIETS OF ДMERIКД, КOMRДDE.

What do you mean, communism is dead? Then who rules in Canada and EU and China??

[madd0ct0r]

If you made this, I'm embarrassed on your behalf,

Not mine, I do have a politcal one in progress, but that's simply comparing the obesity pattern and republican voting pattern across the USA.
It's also misleading due to gerrymandering.

[Dalton]

What makes it "highly factual"?

[Prannon]

I would say that it is because all of the numbers it gives are statistically correct, but given out of context. Thus, the "slightly incomplete" in the OP's title. Made perfect sense to me when I first looked at it.

[madd0ct0r]

Yeah - infographics are a match made in propoganda heaven - a few tenuously connected stats, and a clear message / story to drive it.

As a guy who makes these (though NOT this one) - I'm quite enjoying the rhetorical tricks built into it to make you more likely to absorb or repeat the message - things like bald statements, very clear (if highly misleading) comparisons, building in the propaganda message in icons ect...

My 'slightly incomplete' statement was actually aimed more at the affect of the rebulican controlled senate, who I would hold responsible for the slow rate of recovery.