Visualization Redesign: The Ambiguity of Presidential Election Map

Data Visualization always aims at providing clarity to the audience. More clear the visualization, easier it is for the audience to better judge the numbers they are seeing. Having said that, on account of the completion of recent presidential elections, I would like to shed some light on the ambiguous presidential election map we are shown during the elections.

Our TV screens are bombarded with the above image trying to tell the audiences who might win. But this map is of little use considering the priority of this map is geographic accuracy and NOT electoral importance. In the elections, the electoral importance of a state and not its geographical size decides the results. Massachusetts has four times as many electoral votes as Montana but a much smaller geographic area. Now you see where the confusion is! To give a clearer understanding of the election proceedings, The New York Times designed this “nifty alternative”.

As you can see the states are depicted by a square and the state’s electoral importance decides the size of the square.The size is approximated in proportion to the number of electoral votes. The squares are arranged according to the geographical location so as to not cause any confusion over the location and can locate the states easily.

Reference: http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/ratings/electoral-map