Criticizing other people's figures on my webpage

Question

A few months ago I started collecting papers that contain figures I think convey information in a very efficient manner (i.e., figures that I think are very well illustrated and that should serve as examples of how they should be designed).

Now, because I am a huge data-vis geek, I have been thinking about opening a page on my website in which I talk about how I think figures should be designed and which principles I expect students/coauthors/general public to follow when illustrating data. Consequently, I am inclined towards including some of those amazing figures I have been collecting and talking about them (i.e., why they are efficient and well designed). More controversially, perhaps, is the fact that I also plan to include some figures that I believe were terribly designed and explain in which ways they fail (some of those badly designed figures are actually mine).

While I will seek the adequate rights to post them on my blog (e.g., through RightsLink for Elsevier journals), I would like to hear about the morality of this practice, particularly due to the fact that I will negatively criticize other authors' work.

Is there any moral (or even legal) problem in criticizing other people's figures on my website? Should I expect any sort of retaliation if I decide to do that? I understand that this is largely dependent on the tone I employ, but I will make every effort to be as technical and objective as possible.

Answer 1

I can't even imagine a situation in which criticizing published academic materials on their merits would be wrong or immoral.

How would it be different from criticizing someone's selection of an econometric or statistical model to use on their data? This happens constantly in academic literature, and in fact is crucial to the process of research. The way data is conveyed to others through graphs is no less important than model selection, and both can be used to deceive or obscure.

So as long as you cover two bases:

1. Avoid ad hominem attacks, as you should in all sorts of reviewing, and
2. Follow any copyright rules the publishers impose,

Not only is there nothing wrong with doing it, I would argue that as an academic and data viz expert, you should do it. As for someone taking offense at your criticism? Well, as long as you're professionally criticizing its merits and avoiding problem number 1 from above then it's you who are in the right, and the one taking offense who is in the wrong.

Answer 2

I am not even going to address morality, as that can be a minefield.

Legality can hinge upon where you live. In the USA free speech/free expression would allow for criticism of others works, but be aware that this is a double edged sword.

I would be careful about how you go about picking apart visualized data by others. Be very sure to only go about analyzing the structure/what has been shown, and not to slander the person who created the data visualization.

The thing is, everyone will offend someone somewhere, somehow, sometime. The important thing is that we try to keep the amount of offenses to a minimum. The best way to do this in my opinion, would be that make sure to state that your preferences are just that, preferences.

When we start calling our opinions facts, we start running into problems. I have first hand experience in this, being one with Asperger's Syndrome. I have delusions of "my opinion is the only opinion" thing... and it does not go over well. (and is something I am constantly working on)

Answer 3

Not a good idea. You may mean well but you may offend others, irrespective of the tone or how constructive your criticism is meant to be. People from different cultures react in different ways to criticism, and there is little to no upside in even annoying one person. In addition, if the figures are copyrighted you might get some flak.

It is infinitely better to highlight outstanding examples.

Answer 4

On such a website showing figures and analyzing in how far they are suitable for conveying information, one should stick to the rules of scientific publication.

Things to keep in mind:

1. Not criticize a persons work, but the work itself.
2. Formulate the criticism in a neutral way.

In a research paper you wouldn't say "the authors of ... [ref] were unable to produce sufficiently accurate results", but rather "Those results[ref] are accurate within the range of ....".

I would say the same holds true for showing the pictures. When creating this site always think about if it would go through a peer review process of a scientific journal.

Having a list of "bad pictures" would definitely not pass, but providing a model for some criterion and showing two examples, where one meets the criterion and the other does not, is perfectly fine and probably even useful.

Answer 5

Yous should really ask yourself what do you gain here by using authentic data. I firmly believe you have every right to cite someones work and criticize what's wrong in it. But in context of a blog, what do you really gain from it?

You could just make models based on real life examples. And, if you want to keep the authenticity, every article can end up with:

Example in this article was inspired by real data in insert doi here

But in that case make sure you actually model your own example, copying and editing the data would certainly NOT be OK. At the same time, make sure the problem you illustrate is still the same as in the original.

Yeah, it really boils to gain vs possible loss. Even if you just get some pissed email, you'll have to ask if it was worth it for a blog article.

Answer 6

As I would in any situation with moral ambiguity, I'd apply the golden rule: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

If you would not want others to do it you, then do not do it to others yourself.

On top of which, the fact that you're having moral qualms about it already highlights that it might be something you should avoid.

All this being said, I'm all for "teachable moments."

I would use a blanket "views expressed" disclaimer and keep it as professional as possible about the figures themselves, only.

Before we begin—a little disclaimer…   Any statements made, views expressed, or opinions given represent my personal views and opinions alone.   None of these statements, views, or opinions given by me (nor any of the information appearing on these slides) are endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the University of Alaska, UAA, nor any other colleges or organizations affiliated with these institutions.

The Hidden Costs of Outsourcing: Why Alaska Needs its Own Law School, trwatts.

What do you think?