Three Points and a Question

1.) Tufte summarizes Snow’s “scientific detective work” that “exhibits a shrewd intelligence about evidence, a clear logic of data display and analysis” as a “good idea” and a “good method.” This method includes: “placing the data in an appropriate context for assessing cause and effect,” “making quantitative comparisons,” “considering alternative explanations and contrary cases,” and “assessment of possible errors in the numbers reported in graphics.”

2.) Authorship is important to consider—if the names of authors are given, the ethos of the author becomes part of the document. If texts are anonymous, then no one has to take individual responsibility for the document.

3.) Technical communication does not exist in a bubble; it has real-world implications that must be considered when the document is designed.

Question: Would you agree with Tufte on the importance of visuals? In the case of the Challenger disaster, is it fair to place so much responsibility on the designers of visuals? Consider the role of authorship in government documents; do you think it would lead to unnecessary scapegoating?