While scanning through the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, I came across an article, "New Federal Rules Require Improved Fuel Efficiency," the provided graph projected the expected fuel standards for 2016. Under these new standards, auto companies would have to produce vehicles that average 35 miles per gallon. The Obama administration says that this new standard will reduce carbon dioxide emissions and regulate greenhouse gases.
The picture on this page depicts the high-tech speedometer of the new Sonata Hybrid, but along with this image is a basic line graph which is used to show the anticipated new standards. The graph is pretty basic, it shows how the mileage per gallon in passenger cars and light trucks will steadily increase from 2011 to 2016. Since the news article already stated this fact in the story it's pretty pointless to design a graph based on the same information. By making a graph of the new fuel standards it makes the readers seem ignorant to what they just read.
The graph is simple because it is not cluttered with cute images or contain information overload. But, upon farther inspection it does have its flaws. The graph states that passenger cars contribute to 24% gain in the fuel economy, light trucks 18% and combined it's 24% but what does this all mean? what is percent gain in fuel economy? where are these statistics coming from? how did they estimate that in 2016 passenger cars will be running at 37.8 miles per gallon? and why is the graph limited to just passenger cars and light trucks? This new standard effects all auto companies, so all vehicle types should be included. The graph complicates the story instead of adding to it, and we are left with more questions than answers.
-Dia Vang
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After reading the article, I can see where you have drawn your conclusions. The graphic they give does a good job in its simplistic manner of presenting the information. As you said it does not distract the reader with "cute" images.
ReplyDeleteBut the logic of the graph can also be called into question. The statistics they use are sketchy and muddled. This may distort the information as it is related to the article.
The image of Journal Sentinel provides at the top of the article is basically useless. It doesn't add much other then a flashy escape for the reader. These kind of graphics used today in the media are meant for lazier audiences who need something else besides words. It can be seen in various written texts and is hollow and forgettable.