Data industry’s failure to communicate

Why the serious news learned to aim for the gut and why data communicators must also

Some in the data industry say that data storytelling “never took off” — and I say that whoever says that doesn’t know stories when they see them. Their ignorance is not just laughable. It’s also harmful to the adoption of data for decision support.

Consider the broad appeal of real stories. There’s probably no better case history to demonstrate it than “serious” journalism’s adoption of simple, accessible storytelling as it follows the trajectory set by tabloids and social media. The New York Times, for one, has slowly acquired a better aim for the gut.

To see effective stories, just consider Fox News. In fact, you don’t even have to hold your nose, you can see one Fox story and the meta-story in Flowing Data’s vial. The site’s author, Nathan Yau, analyzes Fox’s particular and notorious form of data stories.

Fox’s chart shows a drop in unemployment for November 2011, during President Obama’s first term, to from 9 percent to 8.6 percent. It’s portrayed as a trivial change. But the intended story is left for the Fox audience to fill in. It’s already in their minds, locked and loaded. (Everyone, no matter what tribe they belong to, has a whole arsenal of narratives at hand, says U.C. Berkeley cognitive linguist George Lakoff.)

Oddly, though, November’s 8.6 percent looks higher in the Fox chart than the previous March’s 8.8 percent. Was unemployment rising? Was the Obama administration doing a bad job? No, the rate had actually improved slightly. But the administration’s poor performance was the story Fox intended to trigger.

Stories can also be told that are based on valid data correctly rendered. But without any story, no one cares about the data. Without stories, the data’s just stupid, lifeless, boring numbers.

If responsible data people can’t master storytelling on their own, may have to rely on the irresponsible ones to teach them.