Yesterday the New York Times published an interactive map of the 2016 presidential election which succeeded inwards annoying a lot of cartographers. The NYT's Extremely Detailed Map of the 2016 Election allows y'all to explore the 2016 presidential election at the voting precinct level.
The map is a peachy tool for exploring how many votes were cast for each presidential candidate at precinct level. It also allows y'all to run across at a glance which precincts overwhelmingly voted for either candidate. It does this past times shading each precinct past times the pct of votes cast for the winning candidate. The darker a precinct is colored reddish on the map together with then the higher the pct of votes cast for Donald Trump. The darker a shade of bluish together with then the higher the pct of votes cast for Hillary Clinton.
It is this selection to shade precincts past times the pct of votes cast for a candidate that has upset a lot of people. The argue why many people are tilt that the NYT map is misleading is because it places likewise much visual weight on the large rural precincts won past times Donald Trump together with distorts the overall lawsuit of the election. For lawsuit Jon Schleuss of the LA Times posted this straight comparing of the NYT election map alongside the LA Times Election map -
Both are maps of the same precinct marking data. However the LA Times map shades the precincts past times the issue of people who alive at that spot rather than past times the pct of votes cast for the winning candidate.Therefore inwards the LA Times precinct election map to a greater extent than visual weight is given to precincts alongside the most voters rather than to the most partisan precincts. The lawsuit is a much to a greater extent than accurate map of the issue of votes cast for each candidate inwards California.
If y'all desire a detailed explanation of the problems alongside the NYT election map together with then y'all should cheque out Kenneth Field's Cartographic Hyperbole post service of the map. Kenneth Filed's considered thoughts on election maps also characteristic prominently inwards the Wired's Is the States Leaning Red or Blue? It All Depends on Your Map. The Wired article looks closely at how the unlike cartographic together with information visualization choices y'all brand tin forcefulness out greatly influence the story your maps tell. The article is illustrated alongside a issue of unlike maps of the 2016 presidential election visualizing the information inwards a issue of unlike ways.
The upshot of all this criticism is non that the NYT election map is wrong. It is simply that the visualization choices made convey resulted inwards a map which could easily mislead users virtually the marking of back upwardly for the winning candidate inwards the 2016 presidential election.
Buat lebih berguna, kongsi:
