The USA Today article, Study: Small Soda Taxes Don't Dent Child Obesity, discusses the futility of recent efforts by some U.S. states to raise the tax on soft drinks in order to prevent childhood obesity. The graphic that accompanies the article shows the outline of an overweight boy. There are six numbered dots on the boy's body, each representing a separate body part. By clicking on a dot, a description pops up which lists the effects of childhood obesity on that body part.
I believe that the graphic itself is good. Although addressing an unfortunate topic, using the overweight boy and the dots is a pretty good idea to get the point across. Also, by listing information for one body part at a time, it really cuts down on clutter and makes it easier to read.
Although the graphic looks good, its relation to the article is suspect. Childhood obesity is discussed in the article, but not as much as the graphic would lead you to believe. Instead, the author spends most of the article bombarding the reader with numerous percentages and dollar amounts, concerning which states raised taxes and by how much. In light of this information I half expected this article to include a series of charts depicting the rise in taxes. Although that would have been very boring and unoriginal, at least it would have been related to what was in the article.
-Audrey
Friday, April 2, 2010
3D Movie Trend
This past year has seen a marked increase in the desire for 3D films in part due to the success of Avatar (2009) which has created a seemingly never-ending stream of studios wanting to cash in on the craze. USA Today has ranked the top four, yes only four, highest-grossing 3D films in this rather uninspired snapshot.
The graphic portrays only the top four highest-grossing 3D films domestically based on their earnings in millions. I found it funny that they depicted people with their mouths open in shock like 3D is an amazing or literally "jaw dropping" experience. Avatar, of course, takes the top spot with $595 million due to its innovative use of 3D. Animated films seem to attract a larger audience for their 3D versions than live-action since the other three films on this list are all animated. In second place is Up (2009) with $293 million which is a little less than half of Avatar's earnings.
The illustrations presented in the graphic are bland with simply the same four images displayed at differing heights to exhibit the earnings like a bar graph. The colors used are also very subdued with all of the text in black. Though I will admit it makes the graphic slightly more noticeable than a simple bar graph would have been. However, the price to see a film in 3D has increased in recent years which calls into question the accuracy of this graph. Are that many more Americans going to see films in 3D or is it the rising prices that make it seem that way? The graph is too simple because it does not give us any details behind the numbers.
This topic does not really have an impact on our lives, and as such isn't what I would consider a newsworthy edition to a supposedly "news" section of USA Today. Furthermore, the graphic wasn't all that effective in describing the rise of 3D films in America today or catching my attention.
Melissa Wesloski
The graphic portrays only the top four highest-grossing 3D films domestically based on their earnings in millions. I found it funny that they depicted people with their mouths open in shock like 3D is an amazing or literally "jaw dropping" experience. Avatar, of course, takes the top spot with $595 million due to its innovative use of 3D. Animated films seem to attract a larger audience for their 3D versions than live-action since the other three films on this list are all animated. In second place is Up (2009) with $293 million which is a little less than half of Avatar's earnings.
The illustrations presented in the graphic are bland with simply the same four images displayed at differing heights to exhibit the earnings like a bar graph. The colors used are also very subdued with all of the text in black. Though I will admit it makes the graphic slightly more noticeable than a simple bar graph would have been. However, the price to see a film in 3D has increased in recent years which calls into question the accuracy of this graph. Are that many more Americans going to see films in 3D or is it the rising prices that make it seem that way? The graph is too simple because it does not give us any details behind the numbers.
This topic does not really have an impact on our lives, and as such isn't what I would consider a newsworthy edition to a supposedly "news" section of USA Today. Furthermore, the graphic wasn't all that effective in describing the rise of 3D films in America today or catching my attention.
Melissa Wesloski
Workers' perks not so newsworthy
While scanning through USA Today's snapshot section, I came across one snapshot that seemed to contradict itself- "What small perks workers want". First of all, the image that first catches your eyes is a man with his legs propped up on the desk, all relaxed and laid back. If i were a boss, I most certainly would not give any of my employees any kind of perks if this is how they showed their work ethic, or lack there of.
As you scroll down the image, the graph is cleverly morphed into the desk that the man has his legs propped up on. This depicts more of employees' demands rather than actual perks that they deserve. The image makes it seem as if it is an employees right to get the persk listed in the graph. This is a terrible misrepresentation of the actual meaning of this snapshot.
Alright, bad imagery-that's fine, let's mover on to what the graph says. The small perks that workers want to "feel more valued" range from free soda and water to donuts for meetings. Seriously, this is considered news? Workers wanting free donuts because they are forced to sit in on a meeting they are already getting paid for. Let's be honest here USA Today, this story is about as newsworthy as "Which celebrity would make the most over-the-top Easter egg?".
Lindsey Arndt
As you scroll down the image, the graph is cleverly morphed into the desk that the man has his legs propped up on. This depicts more of employees' demands rather than actual perks that they deserve. The image makes it seem as if it is an employees right to get the persk listed in the graph. This is a terrible misrepresentation of the actual meaning of this snapshot.
Alright, bad imagery-that's fine, let's mover on to what the graph says. The small perks that workers want to "feel more valued" range from free soda and water to donuts for meetings. Seriously, this is considered news? Workers wanting free donuts because they are forced to sit in on a meeting they are already getting paid for. Let's be honest here USA Today, this story is about as newsworthy as "Which celebrity would make the most over-the-top Easter egg?".
Lindsey Arndt
Beers by the Bushel
Americans certainly seem to be notorious for celebrating their holidays by indulging in drinks. Even now certain events are well known reasons for inebriation. USA Today had a poll showing the top ten beer holidays.
The illustrations are not necessarily that exciting, only showing a cartoon figure holding a glass of beer and he looks generally happy. The cases they show are counted by the millions and placed in order based on holiday or event. First place is July 4th, a well known holiday for celebrating our country by watching fireworks while enjoying a brew. The Super Bowl takes number 10 with about 15 million less cases than July 4th.
The way the chart is set up is rather bland. It just has the image of the boy with the beer, and the only bright color is yellow. The way the numbers are presented isn't very interesting, just simply placed in two rows of five. Adding color to the title might have made it more appealing and noticeable. Still, once you notice the chart, it's hard not to stop and quickly read though it. The illustration isn't the most appealing, but it still is better than just showing the rankings in a glass of beer.
Overall, I find it funny that this is part of USA Today's News category for Snapshots. Clearly the relevence of which holiday is celebrated with beer doesn't really have an impact on our lives. For some it may, but honestly if I had continued life without knowing that Christmas was in sixth place I would probably be fine. It's an interesting fact but I'm still skeptical of how it fits in to the category.
The illustrations are not necessarily that exciting, only showing a cartoon figure holding a glass of beer and he looks generally happy. The cases they show are counted by the millions and placed in order based on holiday or event. First place is July 4th, a well known holiday for celebrating our country by watching fireworks while enjoying a brew. The Super Bowl takes number 10 with about 15 million less cases than July 4th.
The way the chart is set up is rather bland. It just has the image of the boy with the beer, and the only bright color is yellow. The way the numbers are presented isn't very interesting, just simply placed in two rows of five. Adding color to the title might have made it more appealing and noticeable. Still, once you notice the chart, it's hard not to stop and quickly read though it. The illustration isn't the most appealing, but it still is better than just showing the rankings in a glass of beer.
Overall, I find it funny that this is part of USA Today's News category for Snapshots. Clearly the relevence of which holiday is celebrated with beer doesn't really have an impact on our lives. For some it may, but honestly if I had continued life without knowing that Christmas was in sixth place I would probably be fine. It's an interesting fact but I'm still skeptical of how it fits in to the category.
Incarceration Rates
I think this is one of USA Today's classier charts, although that's not saying much. I'm glad that they used the image of a prison instead of, say, groupings of people in orange jump suits, to show which states have the highest and lowest incarceration rates. The chart shows valuable information that we, as citizens, need to know but rarely do.
But I do believe that they should not use a childish image in this chart. Incarceration is a serious matter, and they shouldn't have lightened it up with a colorful picture of the prison. It makes it into something it's not. Every year more of our tax dollars go towards the upkeep of prisons in comparison to schools. The way things are set up, inmates get treated better than school kids do.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
No News to Me: USA’s Shift Towards Urban Life
In USA Today’s graphic “USA’s shift from rural to urban,” the first thing that came to mind was: well, duh. Although 21% of the nation still lives in a rural area, I believe that it is a well known fact that urban living has been on the rise since 1920. The graphic however does do a good job in emphasizing the steady incline that the statistics have taken from 1920 to the 2000’s. The author uses little cowboy and business woman animations for visual supplementation, in case any of the readers out their needed this aid.
The most important thing about this graphic is to show the decline of the rural population; 49% in 1920, 37% in 1960 and 21% in 2000. Supplied with the contrary, the incline of the urban living, it shows the viewer that 79% of the United States population is in this category. The kitschy theme does give more of a visual appeal than any old bar graph, but it gives off more of a casual tone. The two characters shown on this graph also demonstrate a trend that has risen since the 20’s; the urban, career driven animation is a black woman, and the farmer is a white male. It makes it as if this graph has a dual message, although not clearly stated. Women, specifically black women have been given more opportunities in the business world than the early 1900’s.
USA Today is known for their use of color and reporting on irrelevant stories, and it did seem that this graph was random. When in the news category and you can either choose “what small perks workers want” or “USA’s shift from rural to urban,” it seemed clear that this had more news value. I think the graphic means to educate readers on the large percentage of the population who live in urban areas, if they have been hiding under a rock for a while.
Stephanie Orlowski
Rural to Urban Graphic Falls Short
The USA Today snapshot depicting America's shift from a rural to an urban population is not only cluttered and difficult to look at, it's virtually useless. The graphic contrasts the rise in urban living to the steady decline of more rural communities. However, the criss-cross pattern of the image along with the abundance of numbers makes the image visually unappealing as well as confusing. The image also includes "cutesy" pictures of a farmer and a corporate "city slicker", which not only make the image seem childish, but also adds to the overall cluttered appearance.
Secondly, without the caption included on the outside of the graphic, I would've had no clue what the image was even trying to portray. It's titled "USA's Shift from Rural to Urban", but shift from rural to urban what? Fashion? Jobs? Landscapes? Only the description included on the side of the image explains that the graphic is depicting a shift in rural to urban populations.
But, all of this even fails to mention that the message of this graphic is virtually obsolete. The chart depicts a 12% decrease in rural populations from the year 1920 to 1960. Not only is that a relatively insignificant decline to occur in the course of 40 years, but that's to be expected. Think of our country's developments in technology and architecture. Of course we've made a shift to a more urban lifestyle. It'd be more surprising if this change hadn't occurred. With progress comes change. This shift is completely natural.
While I do appreciate USA Today's attempt to share this "news worthy" topic, as well as their adorable clip-art picture of a farmer in overalls, this graphic definitely falls short. With a confusing image and a pointless message, it's safe to say that this chart isn't "news worthy". It's just a waste of space.
Secondly, without the caption included on the outside of the graphic, I would've had no clue what the image was even trying to portray. It's titled "USA's Shift from Rural to Urban", but shift from rural to urban what? Fashion? Jobs? Landscapes? Only the description included on the side of the image explains that the graphic is depicting a shift in rural to urban populations.
But, all of this even fails to mention that the message of this graphic is virtually obsolete. The chart depicts a 12% decrease in rural populations from the year 1920 to 1960. Not only is that a relatively insignificant decline to occur in the course of 40 years, but that's to be expected. Think of our country's developments in technology and architecture. Of course we've made a shift to a more urban lifestyle. It'd be more surprising if this change hadn't occurred. With progress comes change. This shift is completely natural.
While I do appreciate USA Today's attempt to share this "news worthy" topic, as well as their adorable clip-art picture of a farmer in overalls, this graphic definitely falls short. With a confusing image and a pointless message, it's safe to say that this chart isn't "news worthy". It's just a waste of space.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)