192
submitted 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) by Wudi@feddit.uk to c/dataisbeautiful@mander.xyz
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 3 points 14 hours ago

This data is not beautiful; it's propaganda. There is no reason for the y axis to not start at 0.

[-] GioGioMioGio@feddit.org 13 points 11 hours ago

Graphs are ususally adjusted to what they should convey or often to mislead people, I agree. in this case however I personally think the important info is that the amount of casualties is back to where it was 40+ Years ago, not the absolute numbers.

[-] lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 20 points 13 hours ago

Why have a big gap underneath the graph? It is totally normal to adjust the axis to fit the data. This isn't a conspiracy, it's standard math.

[-] binarytobis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

I’m not saying it’s a conspiracy like the guy you replied to, but it’s generally considered correct to include 0 on graphs like this to show proper scale. If I had submitted a paper with this graph in grad school, all of my reviewers would have kicked it back.

[-] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 2 points 12 hours ago

If you want to get technical, it's only standard math if there's a symbol indicating the scale doesn't start at 0. Data is used like this all the time to misrepresent reality and yes, it's considered "normal" to do things that way.

[-] Caducous@lemmy.world 7 points 11 hours ago

50% less fatalities is propaganda?

this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2026
192 points (100.0% liked)

Data is Beautiful

3805 readers
416 users here now

Be respectful

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS