Data Art vs. Data Visualization: Why Does a Distinction Matter? [link]
A pretty hilarious take on data art vs data visualisation, in which the author (Stephen Few) and (most of) the commenters fail to understand what data art is (imo). I am mildly incredulous, however, as much as I don’t want to perpetuate the blog post, I really think it has value in exposing some key issues.
And some of the comments have good points in particular how the visual form
and style can mask whether the data is ‘good’.
EXCERPT:
“Two distinct approaches to presenting data graphically exist today—data visualization and data art—and rarely do the twain meet. They differ in purpose and in design. When we fail to distinguish them from one another, we not only create confusion, but do great harm as well”
[…] How in particular is data art—visualizations that strive to entertain or to create aesthetic experiences with little concern for informing—harmful when it masquerades as data visualization?
-
It suggests that data cannot be visualized without training in the graphic arts. As such, it works against the democratization of data. In fact, anyone of reasonable intelligence and a little training can present data effectively. It’s vital that this ability spreads more broadly across the population, because it can play a role in making a better world.
-
It features ineffective practices as exemplars of data visualization. It encourages people to present data in ways that are difficult to perceive and understand simply because they are prettier or more entertaining, which is rarely relevant to the task.
Visual Business Intelligence – Data Art vs. Data Visualization: Why Does a Distinction Matter?.