rhythmaning (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rhythmaning) wrote2009-06-02 03:34 pm
rhythmaning) wrote2009-06-02 03:34 pm
Entry tags:
Abuse of Graphics
I get annoyed at people who either deliberately or through a lack of understanding misquote or otherwise abuse numbers or statistics. I have been known to shout at the radio when either journalists or politicians misstate or obfuscate, using numbers in an attempt to prove their argument.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
frankie_ecap looked at the leaflet that popped through my door courtesy of the LibDems, and pointed to this graphic:
In case it isn't clear, it compares the number of votes of the three main parties in the last general election - Labour (15,138), LibDems (14,664), Conservative (9,559), with 2,314 other votes.
It is trying to re-inforce the view that the LibDems are only 474 votes behind Labour, and a vote for the Tories is wasted.
The numbers are right, but the graphic distorts the picture dramatically. It shows the Tory votes to be somewhat less than half of the LibDems, and barely ahead of other votes. In fact, the Tory vote was 65% of the LibDems, and over four times the size of the votes for others.
I put the numbers into Excel. Here's what the chart should actually look like:
A rather different picture. The the website of my local LibDem candidate shows a more accurate picture to the one on the leaflet, too:
You probably know by now that I am a LibDem voter. I have been assured that the candidate is a top bloke. But this misrepresentation of the numbers - a blatant distortion - may well have lost him my support.
frankie_ecap looked at the leaflet that popped through my door courtesy of the LibDems, and pointed to this graphic: 
In case it isn't clear, it compares the number of votes of the three main parties in the last general election - Labour (15,138), LibDems (14,664), Conservative (9,559), with 2,314 other votes.
It is trying to re-inforce the view that the LibDems are only 474 votes behind Labour, and a vote for the Tories is wasted.
The numbers are right, but the graphic distorts the picture dramatically. It shows the Tory votes to be somewhat less than half of the LibDems, and barely ahead of other votes. In fact, the Tory vote was 65% of the LibDems, and over four times the size of the votes for others.
I put the numbers into Excel. Here's what the chart should actually look like:
A rather different picture. The the website of my local LibDem candidate shows a more accurate picture to the one on the leaflet, too:
You probably know by now that I am a LibDem voter. I have been assured that the candidate is a top bloke. But this misrepresentation of the numbers - a blatant distortion - may well have lost him my support.
no subject
She's picked the only recent election that had Labour in 3rd place and so her point is completely bogus, but her bar chart is accurate.
no subject