Over at maxgadney.com, he looks at the current popularity of “tower graphics”, those tall multi-screen infographics that typically look pretty but contain little substance, and wonders if they’re really all bad. They’re so popular, why is that? First off, they fulfill the human drive for simple data fast.
But-it cannot be all bad can it? If the purpose of structure is to direct to content, the user already knows that to scroll will enable that, so why shouldn’t the designer concentrate on the information- elements on this expansive canvas, rather than mangling them through some clever trope?
Every time I try to hate these, I imagine people who are just interested in the facts finding them easy to use. (albeit hard to search and re-size etc etc).
After that, they’re also a great opposite to more complex (and I would say Useful) visualization tools.
These tower graphics and videos are going against themassive complexity of other modern data-vis too. They are rejecting the pull of making expert interfaces for experts and awards panels, leaving the average user blank. I like that there are some new simple forms – like these old, archetypal USA Today graphics. (but will I ever love them? probably not – but I ‘quite like’ baked beans – I don’t need to love them)
I too have a bit of a love/hate relationship with these things. They drive pageviews and traffic, and they can be pretty, but so many of them are nothing but junk. Much like 3D in the theaters, the few good ones run the risk of drowning in the plethora of crappy ones.
In his writeup he says, “Lots of shite TV doesn’t make Mad Men unwatchable.”. True, but lots of shite TV can make me drop my cable alltogether and just start watching Hulu.
