I understand Tufte’s explanation on p.59 that the data is more clear in the second fuel economy chart, and his theory that data rather than design variation should be used first. However, I don’t know that all of the completely unrelated “data ink” decorating it makes it any worse than the first example. Couldn’t a gaudy graphic also perpetuate the perception that an information architect is a mere data decorator? I feel that when we design a poster, for example, that we may decide to make certain information more important than the other, as with a concert advertisement, listing the date, time, title, etc. in most noticeable type. But what if the concert date is already well-known among the music community and by those who can afford tickets, but the most desired information is now the music and composer performing? One might tailor a new poster exaggerating featured titles of the musical score, the conductor’s name, etc. So perhaps the word “lie” is too strong to describe the first example of the Fuel Economy chart. The creator may have only been exaggerating the main point – that fuel economy has been increasing. And though at the chapter’s end he claims this is only supporting “lies” I still feel there is room for artistic liberty, especially when the quantitative data is clearly printed for reference.
“Unlike the advertisements at least we don’t put naked women in out graphics,” said Louis Silverman. Quite a comical stab at commercialism, and I would agree that even the most exaggerated of data graphics are more truthful than the majority of promises made in ads.
“Couldn’t a gaudy graphic also perpetuate the perception that an information architect is a mere data decorator?”
Tufte isn’t suggesting that the decoration adds value to the visualization, nor is he putting it forth as an example of good design. He is using exaggeration to get his point across. Some may feel that he is completely against decoration of any kind—decoration being ink used for purposes other than representing data. What I think he is saying here is that you may decorate all you like, if it suits your purpose, as long as you don’t distort the data to do so.
“So perhaps the word “lie” is too strong to describe the first example of the Fuel Economy chart. The creator may have only been exaggerating the main point – that fuel economy has been increasing.”
So when does it stop being exaggeration and become a lie? If there were a diagram that, through use of perspective and scale, downplayed the number of holocaust victims, would that be okay? It’s just exaggeration to illustrate a point.
“…I still feel there is room for artistic liberty…”
Certainly there is. But you must be careful that the liberties you take are enhancing understanding of the information. Would you want your bank taking artistic liberties with a report about your student loan?