I’m not saying it’s a conspiracy like the guy you replied to, but it’s generally considered correct to include 0 on graphs like this to show proper scale. If I had submitted a paper with this graph in grad school, all of my reviewers would have kicked it back.
If you want to get technical, it’s only standard math if there’s a symbol indicating the scale doesn’t start at 0. Data is used like this all the time to misrepresent reality and yes, it’s considered “normal” to do things that way.
This data is not beautiful; it’s propaganda. There is no reason for the y axis to not start at 0.
Why have a big gap underneath the graph? It is totally normal to adjust the axis to fit the data. This isn’t a conspiracy, it’s standard math.
I’m not saying it’s a conspiracy like the guy you replied to, but it’s generally considered correct to include 0 on graphs like this to show proper scale. If I had submitted a paper with this graph in grad school, all of my reviewers would have kicked it back.
If you want to get technical, it’s only standard math if there’s a symbol indicating the scale doesn’t start at 0. Data is used like this all the time to misrepresent reality and yes, it’s considered “normal” to do things that way.
50% less fatalities is propaganda?
Fewer