This is an Op-Chart from the New York Times titled "A year in Iraq" and published on Jan. 6, 2008. With data provided by the American and Iraqi governments and news media organizations (the independent Coalition Casualty Count in particular), the designers created a visual display for the "type and location of each attack responsible for the 2,592 recorded deaths among American and other coalition troops, Iraqi security forces and members of the peshmerga militias controlled by the Kurdish government."
I found the chart interesting because it illustrates a gruesome and serious subject in a very aesthetically pleasing manner. I'm not sure if the color choices were quite appropriate. I also felt it could have used more contrasting graphics to represent which type of soldier died. Overall the designer's successfully portrayed the war's enormous death toll in a less conventional way.
Something to think about.
Here's the link to the chart (where you can actually read it) and the accompanying story: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/opinion/06chart.html?_r=1&scp=8&sq=graphic+design&st=nyt&oref=slogin
2 comments:
clare, i'm so happy you posted this infographic. it stopped me in my tracks when i saw it. i had trouble w/ the specificity of the icons (was a US military death w/ a gun pointed right or left?) and the color-coding for the manner of death. but the simple bar chart of fatalities by province told a clear story. we'll definitely pick this one up when we cover infographix in lecture.
I think the idea is a really interesting one and the design is intriguing to the eye but I can't help feeling that one of the purposes of the graphic (to succinctly demonstrate the cost of this war in terms of lives) was missed. By using little cartoon figures to stand for people leaves me with no greater understanding of the lives lost. It is as informative to me as a faceless number. It seems to demonstrate the difficulty of harmonizing a good design and a desired effect.
Post a Comment