Assignment 2

02_activities/assignments/assignment_2.md

@@ -11,17 +11,26 @@
     - Explain (with reference to material covered up to date, along with readings and other scholarly sources, as needed) why you classified that visualization the way you did.
       ```
       Your answer...
+        Bad viz: The 2014 viz at this link https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2015/05/12/seeking-safety?fsrc=scn%2Ftw%2Fte%2Fbl%2Fed%2Fseeking_safety&%3Ffsrc%3Dscn%2F=tw%2Fdc 
+
+        Context and Policy → This is an infographic used in an economy magazine online. It is safe to assume that the audience is curious in expenditure and spending trends. Presenting data related to immigration can have significant political consequences ranging from shifting opinions to directly informing policy. 
 
+        Data structure → The infographic aims to capture European asylum seeker application decisions following the onset of the Syrian war and the following refugee crisis. The authors used an Alluvial diagram to represent the flow of refugees from their country of origin to their destinations in Europe. 
 
+        Why this viz is not the best → 
 
+        a-There is a discrepancy between the total # of asylum decisions in 2014 (388,620) and the total # decisions listed in the infographic (138,945). One could argue that this is hinted at by the subtitle "Main origin and destination countries", since there seemingly are other European cities where refugees have gone to. However, this does not make a lot of sense, since the data included in this infographic is inclusive of about 36% of all asylum decisions. Therefore, the geographical of the data is unclear, and the phrasing is misleading. 
 
+        b-Between 2011-2014 it was impossible to discuss immigration without addressing the Syrian war. The authors seem to be hinting at this by including the increase in the # of total asylum decisions from 2012 to 2014. That being said, there is a significant amount of non-Syrian applicants in this viz. About 30% of the applicants are from continental EU,11% from Africa and 21% from East Asia. It is unclear whether the article is focusing on the impact of the Syrian war on immigration treands, or if it's a general cross-sectional analysis of trends. 
 
+        c-The infographic is paywalled. There is no economic data on this graph yet the article is in the Economist. The average reader who only sees the infographic can easily make up a quick-and-dirty interpretation that the Syrian war increased the number of Syrian refugees, and that this increased immigration related costs. But as I discussed in point b above, there is a significant portion of individuals from elsewhere who also contributed to economic costs associated with immigration processes. Looking at the 2012 viz, you can actually see that the # of Serbian applicants increased, so did Afghan applications, too. Yes, these are much smaller increases compared to that in the Syrian group, yet, because the messaging and/or interpreation of the viz in terms of economics is unclear, the average reader might end up with a shallow interpretation. 
 
+        d- No source
 
-      ```
     - How could this data visualization have been improved?  
       ```
       Your answer...
+        Improvements: This can be improved by removing the reference to 2012 ###s, by clarifying the messaging with respect to the economic impact of the immigration trends, and by addressing the discrepancy in the proportions I mentioned in point a. 
 
 
 
@@ -30,8 +39,12 @@
 
 
       ```
+
+Good viz:  
 - Word count should not exceed (as a maximum) 500 words for each visualization (i.e. 
-300 words for your good example and 500 for your bad example)
+Please refer to the file "good viz"
+
+The aim of the viz is super clear--the title sets the context up. The sankey diagram is a great fit for showing the changes in seats across different Scottish parties. A great number of data points is condensed into an easily interpretable visual. 
 
 ### Why am I doing this assignment?: