This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I urge folks to take a look at this graph. Peak comedy.
Wow yeah, that's good enough to be one of the example graphs in "How to Lie with Statistics".
More options
Context Copy link
Masterpiece of a stacked bar chart.
Look at that subtle axis breakage, the tasteful placement of it. Oh my god, components are even split out into different columns.
The AI-art naysayers are right; there’s no way AI can generate art with this much soul and creativity.
More options
Context Copy link
Really gives the impression of an organization doing its level best to be transparent and honest. Can you imagine still questioning their integrity after looking at that?
I wonder if the government told them to hush up their involvement, or if it just seemed like the obvious choice.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This is one of the worst graphs I’ve ever seen.
Not only is it wildly misleading, it’s a perversion of the concept of a bar graph! The adjacent columns don’t compare data, they just break it out into components. I assume the creator chose this because he couldn’t make a pie chart that cheats so hard.
There are only five pieces of information on each chart. We’re approaching Pravda levels. Tufte must be spinning in his—wait, he’s still alive. He should be informed of this tragedy, but sending this graph might be considered harassment.
I can't recall where I saw it, but I saw some newspaper clipping a while back that just straight-up had no correlation between the pie chart size and the percentage. With subtle manipulation, this would be hard to detect and could even be plausibly denied as intentional manipulation rather than carelessness, but this one, IIRC, had a sliver with a number greater than 50% over a slice whose arc was clearly under 180 degrees. It certainly made me more careful about paying close attention to every part of a chart and their correlation to the underlying data whenever I encountered a chart in some article. Which kind of defeats the purpose of charts, but what can you do.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The fixed version highlights the absurdity of the original: https://twitter.com/politicalmath/status/1648299180945801218
More options
Context Copy link
This is some Lib Dem Bar Charts level nonsense, wow. There's lying with statistics and then there's this.
Wild. My go-to was always DefenseCharts, but that’s a much better example for actual numeric nonsense.
At this point, I think that the smarter Lib Dems use bar graphs simply to amuse and catch the attention of sad and overly political nerds, who are one of the groups who will still consider voting for them. It's self-parody that only the people who like proportional representation will understand, or at least I hope it's self-parody...
This comment is too boo outgroup and antagonistic.
As a long-term Liberal Democrat and statistics geek, I resent this aggressive moderation of a factually accurate. After three or more pints of Real Ale (20 oz pints - we're British) the finer points of the Single Transferable Vote and Site Value Rating are quite exquisitely interesting to sad and overly political nerds such as myself.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link