4 ms·

Hiding the labels of the axis is dishonest. Choosing a good frame to compare different values is not. Would you consider this chart misleading: https://trading

Hiding the labels of the axis is dishonest. Choosing a good frame to compare different values is not. Would you consider this chart misleading: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp ? edit: they gain nothing by making the 3 appear safer than the S and X. They make much bigger margin on the most expensive models, and they want to increase demand for them (while they're ramping up the 3 production and go through the huge backlog). Although they've stopped anti-selling the 3, they certainly don't want people to think of the 3 has a newer/better version of the S.

ianai 8y ago
I think they chose their axis range to make the differences starker than they are. Their graph doesn’t include a value for the highest probabilities, for instance. I’m all for zooming a graph to maximize information content, but a range of 5-8% doesn’t present a clear heuristic tie to any widely known phenomenon. A range of 5-10% would have the benefit of being easier to tie to 1/20 to 1/10 odds. Having said that, this is Tesla’s website. Of course it’s all sales copy to move product.
crististm 8y ago
The one you mention is not misleading: they put the Y values everywhere in the chart. The other one is starting at 5% and ending at 8%. While a full range 0-100% would bury the relevant data, a picture with 0-10% would tell a different story.
superlopuh 8y ago
I do, and I don't think I'm the only one. There is no hint of the bars continuing below the axis, and the effective result is the impression that the relative difference is larger than it really is. Even the gradients seem poorly chosen, the bar gets to full white by the bottom. My intuitive first impression is that if the gradient cannot continue below the chosen cut off point, then the bar cannot continue either.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  >There is no hint of the bars continuing below the axis Aren't the numbers big and bold enough? Should we only design chart while presuming that viewers can't read numbers?
- coryfklein 8y ago
  Scaling graphs is not so out of the norm that you need to explicitly call out when you are doing it. Just present your axes and label them correctly.

ianai 8y ago

I think they chose their axis range to make the differences starker than they are. Their graph doesn’t include a value for the highest probabilities, for instance. I’m all for zooming a graph to maximize information content, but a range of 5-8% doesn’t present a clear heuristic tie to any widely known phenomenon. A range of 5-10% would have the benefit of being easier to tie to 1/20 to 1/10 odds. Having said that, this is Tesla’s website. Of course it’s all sales copy to move product.

crististm 8y ago

The one you mention is not misleading: they put the Y values everywhere in the chart. The other one is starting at 5% and ending at 8%. While a full range 0-100% would bury the relevant data, a picture with 0-10% would tell a different story.

superlopuh 8y ago

I do, and I don't think I'm the only one. There is no hint of the bars continuing below the axis, and the effective result is the impression that the relative difference is larger than it really is. Even the gradients seem poorly chosen, the bar gets to full white by the bottom. My intuitive first impression is that if the gradient cannot continue below the chosen cut off point, then the bar cannot continue either.

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
>There is no hint of the bars continuing below the axis Aren't the numbers big and bold enough? Should we only design chart while presuming that viewers can't read numbers?
coryfklein 8y ago
Scaling graphs is not so out of the norm that you need to explicitly call out when you are doing it. Just present your axes and label them correctly.