Criticism

Information Visualization (InfoVis) is an exciting field to watch grow and expand into ever new areas. Last year brought some interesting developments that point towards changes in how we do and see visualization. What does 2010 hold in store? Here is a look back and some ideas where we're heading.

Last week, I attended the seminar on Turning Statistics into Knowledge, organized by the OECD, the World Bank, and the US Census Bureau. That was an interesting way of spending two days, and I saw some interesting ideas and talked to many great people. But it was also a reminder of how little understanding of visualization there really is, and how far we have to go to make good visualizations available and work for a variety of users.

A while ago, I complained about the state of visualization on the web. To improve things, I am co-organizing a workshop at VisWeek in October to discuss the status quo, potential problems, and to find new ways to get visualization people to make their mark online. Whether you have a blog or website, don't have a blog or website, plan on starting one, are afraid of starting one, or think this whole web thing is just a fad – we want to hear from you!

When I look around my little corner of the Internet, I see a few other people doing related stuff, but I also see a lot of unrealized potential. Why are there so few people in the visualization community who run a website? Why are the most popular visualization-related sites almost entirely about pointing at colorful pictures done by others, rather than doing their own? And how can we get more original, quality visualization content on the web?

The New York Times has an interesting interactive visualization on the influence of presidents on the economy. They ask, Can a President Tame the Business Cycle? The visualization they use is not bad, but would be much more readable if it used a better color scale.

There's new competition for Swivel and Many Eyes: iCharts. A good name, to be sure, but will they live up to their promise of being "YouTube for Charts" (a claim Swivel also made in the beginning)? A first look at their website suggests that they likely will not.

The New York Times uses some of the best information graphics and visualizations on its web site and in the printed paper. But there is also a strange undercurrent of bad graphics, many of which commissioned from other sources, and often published in the New York Times Magazine. It almost feels like between all the good graphs, they need an outlet for the crazy stuff.