There is an element of truth to your question. Certainly if you spend any time on any of the infographic sites there is some really cool stuff that is good enough to hang on a wall.
However the issue is that to use stats properly you need some prior knowledge of the market or subject you are examining and too frequently a stat or infographic is shown to someone to tell a story because they are too stupid/lazy/busy to do their own research and form the opinion via informed reasoning.
When you do things the quick way information becomes unreliable at best and at worst dangerous.
The fact that people are still tweaking stuff from 40 years ago shows a bigger problem.
A) why do they care?
B) what's the agender?
C) how much credence can we put on further work...
This fact that maths becomes subjective then puts it in with the Tate modern....
However the issue is that to use stats properly you need some prior knowledge of the market or subject you are examining and too frequently a stat or infographic is shown to someone to tell a story because they are too stupid/lazy/busy to do their own research and form the opinion via informed reasoning.
When you do things the quick way information becomes unreliable at best and at worst dangerous.
The fact that people are still tweaking stuff from 40 years ago shows a bigger problem.
A) why do they care?
B) what's the agender?
C) how much credence can we put on further work...
This fact that maths becomes subjective then puts it in with the Tate modern....
Cant claim to have read them all, but an initial supporting investigation with a sample size of 710 would seem to support your claim 
Comment