Digital political infographics: A rhetorical palette of an emergent genre

Introduction

Modern-day infographics are part of a rich and abundant tradition of conveying information through images. The history of informational art spans over millennia, from early cave paintings, depicting the environments in which the painters lived, through emblem books, educating the masses with allegoric tales, to the many incarnations of cartographic, astronomic, architectural, and scientific visualizations (Aubert et al., 2014; Stegemeier, 1946). Information visualizations (or “infographics”) have thus evolved as versatile forms of expression, serving communicative functions ranging from pedagogy through governance to navigation (Drucker, 2014).

In the past decade, the growing use of social media corresponded with a vast expansion not only in the volume of information visualizations ¹ but also in the realms in which they are used. This article focuses on the extensive use of infographics in the digital political arena by a variety of actors, including activists, campaigners, organizations, and engaged citizens. The centrality of infographics was well demonstrated in the past two US elections, for example in Donald Trump’s 2016 animated infographic “Wall Street is with Her” or Barack Obama’s 2012 “Romney’s Entitlement Society” infographic. Throughout years of articulation and circulation, some recurrent patterns have emerged in these infographics’ modes of construction, such that we can now speak of an emergent genre of the “digital political infographic.” ²

Digital infographics constitute new ways of discussing and understanding politics. While, at face value, this form of communication facilitates data-based and easily accessible political discourse, the amalgamation of political data and visual representations may result in complex modes of data-politics which obfuscate as much as they clarify. This is particularly true when infographics are located in new digital interfaces which often epitomize a dual fascination with data and visual representations. Yet, despite its prominence and significance, the rhetorical construction of digital political infographics has not yet received systematic scholarly attention. Addressing this gap, this study ventures to define how information visualizations—previously used mainly for pedagogical and instructive purposes in an array of realms—are used for political persuasion within the context of digital media. We focus on three unexplored realms: the identification of subtypes within the broad genre of political infographics, the investigation of infographic narrative strategies, and the conceptualization of the ways in which users are invited to interact with the visualized data through digital interfaces. Put simply, our overarching question is, “How do the ‘digital’ and the ‘political’ interact with the veteran infographic genre to create distinct discursive formats?”

In the first part of the article, we set the conceptual framework for addressing this question, surveying the features of the infographic genre in the pre-digital world and the possible shifts it may entail in contemporary digital media landscapes and when applied to new contexts of political discourse. We then describe the method through which we analyze this emergent genre—a grounded analysis of 200 Twitter-based political infographics. Drawing on this analysis, we present a two-dimensional rhetorical typology of the genre. The first, narrative-oriented dimension comprises nine infographic types gathered under three question-led themes: what, who, and how. The second and complementary dimension probes infographics as interfaces and defines four levels of infographic “tactility.” An integrative analysis of these dimensions yields an evaluation of digital political infographics as a hybrid genre that is constituted by the interplay between political persuasion, infographic conventions, and techno-cultural features.

Infographics in an analogue world

Infographics (or information visualization) are graphic compositions of one or more data visualizations ³ designed to convey complex data sets in a comprehensible and accessible manner (Schroeder, 2004; Smiciklas, 2012). In its classic form, an infographic uses a combination of visual metaphors, figures, and text to present data and relationships between variables (Cairo, 2012). The rhetorical advantage of using infographic tools lies in the ability to “combine the aesthetic sensitivity of artistic values with the quantitative precision of numerical data” in a form of communication that is “both understandable and dramatic” (Lester, 1995: 194).

Graphic displays of information are rooted in the history of knowledge production. From cave paintings and early pictographic languages to ancient scientific writings, our understanding of the world around us was formed through visual representations (Siricharoen, 2013; Ware, 2004). Throughout history, although infographics have been used in many contexts (such as education, business, and entertainment), their main usage was for instructional purposes, as infographics harness the capacities of human visual perception to assist in cognitive processes of comprehending complex data sets (Lankow et al., 2012).

Yet, there were times throughout history when infographics made appearances in persuasive political contexts, both in a narrow sense relating to governance and policy and in the broader sense of societal power relations. Considered by many to be the first political infographic, Florence Nightingale’s 19th-century diagram of the causes of military mortality on the Eastern Front was presented to the British Parliament in order to raise awareness of the dire hygiene issues facing the troops (Kopf, 1916). In the early 20th century, infographics were introduced into the journalistic field, eventually evolving into editorial infographics, whose main distinction from their predecessors was the addition of a rhetorical strategy which narrates, explains, or summarizes the visualized data sets. The editorial elements of 20-century infographics, which were originally meant to save editors column inches in data-heavy news stories, were then applied to the advertising of commercial products (Lankow et al., 2012; Siricharoen, 2013).

The prominent use of infographics in education and journalism has brought forth a body of literature which aimed at typifying data visualizations. In Edward Tufte’s (1983) foundational work, he divided data-based infographics into four main formats: statistical graphs (visualizations that rely on quantitative data without adding another layer); data maps (combining cartographic form, variables of distance, and visualized quantitative data); time series (which place quantitative data within a visual temporal context); and relational graphics (which utilize composition to convey differences in size between variables and analogize the properties of data sets with the physical world). Tufte’s work was mostly aimed at the creators of visualizations and underpinned the idea of graphical excellence, which states that first-rate infographics should include a data-to-ink ratio that uses minimal graphical elements to convey as much data as possible. As a by-product of this assertion, he coined the term “chartjunk” to negatively depict ornamental graphical elements that do not convey data in an infographic.

The expansion in the use of infographics in the past decade has led to subsequent efforts to characterize them. Kennedy et al.’s (2016) recent analysis adds an important critical perspective to Tufte’s design-oriented approach. Addressing visualizations from a social semiotics standpoint, these authors claimed that infographics create a sense of objectivity, transparency, and facticity. This “aura of truthfulness” (Kennedy et al., 2016: 722) is constructed through four main conventions: (1) clean layouts—which allow the readers a greater focus by obscuring the complexity of the data; (2) two-dimensional viewpoints—which apply a god-like, eagle’s-eye view on data that neutralize distortions and create a premise of objectivity; (3) geometric shapes—which activate serenity and help the readers to calmly understand their surroundings; and (4) inclusion of data sources—which adds a sense of transparency.

While the aforementioned studies have been extremely valuable in exposing both the conventions and the possible implications of infographics’ extensive use, contemporary digital political infographics provide a new scholarly challenge. The veteran infographic genre, oriented toward education and journalism, is now applied vastly and frequently as a political tool within a new technological setting which features code-based interfaces and participatory culture. These shifts in purpose and setting are likely to influence the ways in which data are presented and experienced in infographics, entailing a possible emphasis on persuasion, engagement, and entertainment.

Digital infographics as shareable interfaces

In the past decade, infographics have flourished in a variety of politically oriented digital arenas, including both major news outlets and a plethora of social media (Krum, 2013; Lankow et al., 2012). Beyond their reliance on data and visualization, infographics in these new spheres operate both as code-based interfaces and as “shareable” artifacts for social exchange. In what follows, we will explore the possible implications of this dual positioning of contemporary infographics as interfaces and spreadable texts.

Digital infographics are complex intersections between interfaces, people and data. Dwelling on a conceptualization of interfaces as systems through which relations between a user and a device are executed, experienced, and displayed (Frosh, 2018; Pold, 2005), we argue that some infographic types invite users to manipulate onscreen objects in ways that shape distinct experiences. Thus, while generally the working of the computer is transparent to end-users (Chun, 2008, 2011), in these instances participants experience infographics as interfaces which are explicitly open to modification.

Interactive infographics may thus introduce new forms of experiencing data in an era marked by the so-called “big data” turn. Simply put, the term relates to the growth in the use, variety, and volume of data (and its computer-based aggregation, analysis, and display), in many realms of life (Cukier and Mayer-Schoenberger, 2013; Manyika et al., 2011). Over the past decade, the concept itself—as well as its prevalent modes of construction—has generated a substantive amount of critical evaluations. Thus, big data has been treated as a sociocultural logic in which data is given a pivotal role as an agent of truth and objectivity, when the mere size of a data set is perceived as evidence of its eminent value (boyd and Crawford, 2012). Yet, building on Cukier and Mayer-Schoenberger (2013), it is important to stress that big data should not be understood only in terms of size—it is also characterized by “the ability to render into data many aspects of the world that have never been quantified before” (p. 29). This constant expansion of “datafication” (Cukier and Mayer-Schoenberger, 2013) is pivotal in the current rise of infographics, which transform complex data points into comprehendible forms (Gregg, 2014).

While the study of the uses and meanings of data are expanding, there remains a gap in our understanding of the intersection between the cultural role of data and the interfaces through which users access it. Following Galloway’s (2006) notion that software combines reflexivity (stating boundaries, methods, and rules) and obfuscation (creating coherence by way of information hiding), we wish to examine the ways in which digital infographics manifest and obfuscate their use of data.

Current scholarly efforts to characterize digital infographics focus mainly on relatively narrow questions of effectiveness, rather than on the relationships between data, visualization, and interface that they sustain. For example, Zwinger and Zeiller (2016) asserted that digital infographics include three forms of visualization display: static, motion infographics, and interactive (which allow readers to engage with the visualization and visualized data via a clickable, moveable, or editable interface) (see also Dur, 2014). Optimistic accounts depict interactive infographics as a tool that may facilitate new understanding through the interaction itself.

While existing literature on the use of interactivity in infographics has tended to view interactivity as a technological feature, other works on interactivity have focused on its communicative dimensions (e.g. Jensen, 1998; McMillan, 2002). In this article, we build on McMillan’s (2002) communication-oriented model in which interactivity is analyzed according to two main lenses: the amount of control the receiver is allowed over the communication and the direction of communication. This yields a four-part typology which includes “feedback” (one-way communication with high levels of receiver control), “monologue” (one-way communication with low levels of receiver control), “mutual discourse” (two-way communication with high levels of receiver control), and “responsive dialogue” (two-way communication with low levels of receiver control). Although McMillan’s work did not focus on infographics, her categories may be useful if we replace traditional sender and receiver roles with the interaction between user, interface, and data.

Digital political infographics are not only a product and manifestation of computer-based interfaces but are also cultural artifacts which are used as currencies in social exchanges, objects of “sharing” (John, 2016) in networked communities. While in the past, infographics were mainly circulated by professional agents, in this new, participatory era, such content units need to be “spreadable” (Jenkins et al., 2013), that is, to propagate within and between social networks of numerous engaged users. Some of the attributes that were depicted in previous studies as enhancing such engagement may, however, be somewhat foreign to the veteran education-oriented infographic genre. These relate, in particular, to direct calls for action (Chielens and Heylighen, 2005) and to attempts to trigger high-arousal emotions such as anger (Berger and Milkman, 2010). As detailed below, while these features were not part of the classic education-oriented infographic, they may be found, in modified ways, in its new digital and political incarnations.

Infographics as political tools

As stated above, infographics are prevalent in contemporary political discourse. Data visualizations can serve many functions in the political world, from instructing the public about political issues, through expanding our understanding of conflicts (as in the case of “controversy mapping”; Venturini, 2012), ⁴ to aiding a political actor in gaining headway in the competition over the dominant narrative of a political reality (Franz and Ridout, 2010). The latter function, namely, of political persuasion, is heavily tied to infographics’ role as spreadable objects: once infographics enter the highly politicized realm of social media, participants are expected to use them for persuasion and mobilization, as they do with other content types such as memes and hashtags (Highfield, 2017; Shifman, 2013).

When examining the potential intersections between political persuasion and the infographic genre, two particularly intriguing attributes emerge: personalization and emotionality. While these are central pillars of contemporary political discourse, they are somewhat new to the infographic genre. As infographics were, originally, a pedagogical tool, the notion of personalization is essentially foreign to them: educational tools usually employ abstractions, which are rarely personalized. In addition, the strong emotional tone employed in political rhetoric is foreign to the subtle emotionality of infographic tradition.

Over the Past decades, political discourse has shifted its rhetorical focus from parties and issues to candidate-oriented narratives (Bennett, 2012), which emphasize the personality and the charisma of politicians (Balmas and Sheafer, 2010). This does not mean that issue-centered campaigns are without merit or effect; studies have shown that certain issue-based strategies can affect exposure when combined with the right candidate persona (Jang and Oh, 2016). Infographics may introduce a shift to this trajectory, as they are, in essence, issue-oriented rather than candidate—or party—centered. In what follows, we examine the extent to which the use of infographics inserts issue-based content into the relatively personalized discursive sphere.

Whether focused on candidates or issues, persuasive political rhetoric exploits a variety of emotional appeals and activation strategies. The political outcomes of emotional stimuli are contested: some claim that negative messages eliciting fear or anxiety are most effective, while others emphasize the advantages of positivity and enthusiasm (Schwartz, 2000). The prevalence of emotionality in contemporary political discourse (which is augmented by the aforementioned centrality of emotions in viral content) stands in contrast to the pedagogical contexts and reserved style characterizing classic infographics. This potential tension—and the ways in which it is negotiated—is examined henceforth.

Infographics have rarely been studied in political contexts. The few studies referring to the strategy or effect of infographics as a tool for political persuasion have not delved into the implications of variations within the genre itself. This study thus aims to identify subgenres of political infographics. It also seeks to look into the narrative strategies of infographics, in addition to the visual analysis characterizing previous studies. A further gap that we address relates to the intersection between political infographics and digital interfaces. In particular, we try to identify and conceptualize the distinct ways in which people are invited to interact with data in these new contexts. The overarching aim of this study is, therefore, to identify and define rhetorical patterns specific to digital political infographics.

Method

This study is based on a corpus derived from Twitter’s API over the course of 35 months (May 2012 to April 2015) using a set of political keywords ⁵ combined with the hashtag “#Infographic.” ⁶ Code-based (custom programmed) queries were employed to manipulate the limitations set forth by the Twitter API (application programming interface) in order to extract as wide and varied a sample as possible. Our goal was to create a diverse sample of infographics of various levels of success and encapsulate the genre in its entirety. Informed by studies which found that retweet success odds are extremely low (Nahon and Hemsley, 2013), we deliberately sampled a portion (n = 100) of popular infographics (infographics that were retweeted a considerable number of times) within the corpus of 1467 infographics, onto which we added a random sample of an additional 100 infographics to create a richly diverse sample (N = 200) ranging from 0 to 537 retweets per infographic.

The analysis of the sample followed recent modifications of the grounded theory approach (Strauss and Corbin, 1998), which combine inductive category building with an account of existing theoretical frameworks in the constant process of interpretation (Kelle, 2007). Both authors inspected the sample thoroughly several times and grouped the units around a number of motifs, which were refined in a process of constant comparison until the main categories emerged.

The major categories underpinning our corpus relate to three “WH” questions leading infographic narratives: “what” (focusing on events and issues), “who” (people), and “how” (processes). Additional analysis of the use of data for purposes of political rhetoric underpinning each major theme led to their further division into nine distinct types. Beyond the leading narrative strategy (the ethos or logos around which the textual narrative is built, which is formed and informed by the above WH questions), we also looked into the data treatment strategy (the strategic selection of specific data types for visualization) and the visualization strategy (choices related to the construction of imagery) in order to construct the categories in a manner that addressed all facets of infographic rhetoric.

In addition to the narrative-based typology, we also traced a further dimension labeled as “tactility.” This dimension relates to the types of code-user-data interactions that infographics facilitate. All types were developed and fine-tuned until each infographic in the corpus was associated with two of the types (one in each dimension of narrative and tactility).

A typology of digital political infographics

The categories and types depicted below (visualized in Figure 1) incorporate a broad range of infographics that deliver their message in different tenors, aim for various goals, and take multiple emotive approaches.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Digital political infographics: a two-dimensional rhetorical typology.

What?—information packets, prices paid, and expected consequences

The first rhetorical category is centered around a seemingly simple question: What is X? Although ostensibly straightforward, this query usually requires the distillation of a thematic universe into a single issue, event, or policy. Within this category, we identified three types: information packets, prices paid, and expected consequences.

Information packets are informative displays in which the narrative strategy deconstructs a topic into a set of quantitatively based facts. The data treatment strategy involves a succinct set of quantitative variables based on a visible source list. In line with the minimalistic data and narrative approaches, the typical visual display uses a clean aesthetic with minimal chartjunk elements. For example, “The Labour Market Update“ infographic (Figure 2) summarizes the state of the Scottish job market in a clean composition in which all visual elements serve to explain the data without additional textual interpretation. The resulting rhetoric is reminiscent of the journalistic editorial infographic predecessor.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

SPICe—The Information Centre: Labour Market Update infographic.

The infographics in the prices paid category, on the other hand, display the (often harsh) results of policies or historical processes (which are ongoing or occurred in the past). They are explicitly persuasive and loaded with emotional and political conviction. The data treatment strategy in these infographics often involves multiple visualized data sets, which tend to require textual explanation to convey a narrative of causality. The general visualization strategy comprises busy, highly detailed visualizations. Infographics in this category often employ emotive visual elements designed for dramatization, mostly human images in extreme settings. For example, in the infographic “The 1991 Gulf War“ (Figure 3), a relational graphic visualization of the ratio of Coalition and Iraqi forces casualties is emoted with X’s marked on human images.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

The 1991 Gulf War and the destruction of Iraq infographic.

Expected consequences infographics bear resemblance to prices paid infographics in their visual strategy, emotiveness, data selection strategy, and persuasive rhetoric. They do, however, differ in their time perspective, as this type of infographic rhetoric displays expectations of future consequences of an event, a policy, or decision. For example, an infographic titled “More Crop Per Drop“, which deals with the water prospects of the world, provides deterioration projections as well as proposed solutions and their effects.

Who?—“data-fining” individuals and groups

The second category of political infographics focuses on people, either as individuals (further divided into horserace and luminaries) or as groups (contrasted standpoints and comparative injustice). While these types vary in their data-politics, they all employ what we have dubbed “data-fining”—the data-related evaluation of human beings.

The horserace type comprises individual-centered infographics focused on political figures. Strongly echoing the aforementioned trends of political personalization, horserace infographics compare two political candidates using data and visual imagery to dramatize the competition. The data selection strategy is characterized by abundance: there are typically over 10 data sets in one horserace infographic. The visualization strategy combines pseudo-scientific quantitative graphs with decorative elements (e.g. party symbols), offering readers recognizability and cultural context. Horserace infographics often utilize a composition entailing a vertical split dividing the data between the two individuals (see Figure 4). Within this type, a considerable number of infographics frame the outcomes of an election as a function of social media metrics, often highlighting entertainment-oriented aspects, which are likely to serve well the “spreadability” of such texts.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 4.

How do Obama and Romney compare on Twitter infographic.

While horserace infographics apply the same set of criteria to compare between two (seemingly equivalent) competitors, the infographics in the luminaries type strive to define individuals as singular. The narrative strategy of luminaries relies heavily on the temporal motif as an organizing framework through which the individual’s life achievements are summarized. An exemplary case is the “Nelson Mandela“ infographic (Figure 5) which depicts his extraordinary life by listing his achievements on a timeline and emphasizing the highpoints with photographs.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 5.

Nelson Mandela: South Africa’s first Black president infographic.

The next two types deal with collectives. In contrast to the first two who types, they are not defined by one form of visualization but by a comparative logic which translates into a variety of visual and data selection strategies.

Contrasted standpoints infographics define two or more worldviews or opinions using a relational approach to their differences. The data selection strategies in this type vary from entirely idea-based data sets to statistical data sets, andthe visualization strategy mimics the narrative by choosing visualization tools that highlight the differences among the contrasted elements. For instance, in an infographic titled “Left Government vs. Right Government”, a vertical split side-by-side composition and color contrasts signify each ideological group.

Comparative injustice infographics reveal inequality, mistreatment, or marginalization of a group by contrasting it with a dominant, privileged one. In order to prove this injustice, the narrative strategy lists idea-based opinions and quantitative data that demonstrate the group’s mistreatment in regard to a specific issue. The main divide discussed in our sample was gender equality; for example, the “Women: Election 2012” (Figure 6) infographic compares the political standing of women and men in the United States through six visualized data sets. While all infographics adapted a persuasive approach in displaying injustice, some even attempted to encourage further action, as in the “Women: Election 2012” infographic which explicitly asks readers to join the digital debate on this issue.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 6.

Women: Elections 2012 infographic.

In terms of data treatment strategy, there is a strong quantitative element in all of the infographics in the Comparative injustice type, as quantitative data lends itself quite easily to visual displays of inequality. Visually, the data are displayed in complex formats, including both scientific graphs and decorative and emotive elements. Dichotomies relating to identity are marked by the use of different colors for each group and distinct silhouettes for men and women. In other words, the infographics in this type fire on multiple rhetorical cylinders in order to get their message across.

Discussion: the birth of a hybrid genre

The typology of digital political infographic rhetoric presented above reflects the distinct ways in which narratives, data, visualization, and code intersect. While so far we have looked at each category separately, their integrative evaluation reveals several patterns which deepen our understanding of this emergent genre. The overarching principle of these threads is that digital political infographics are hybrid formats, combining characteristics originating from political persuasion tactics with characteristics native to the veteran genre of infographics and features stemming from their digital habitat. These influences move in three directions which we have termed politicizing infographics, infographed politics, and finding new common grounds.

Politicizing infographics relates to the process by which characteristics relating to contemporary modes of political persuasion are incorporated (albeit in modified, somewhat moderated ways) into the infographic genre. The main shift in this direction relates to objectives. While political campaigns are often geared toward persuasion and mobilization, infographics have traditionally been used mainly as an informative tool. When taking a wide-angle view at the nine types, we found that the majority of the infographics are divided between the informative approach, which (in its explicit level, at least) seeks to inform or enlighten readers (evident mainly in information packets, contrasted standpoints, and anatomy), and the persuasive approach, which attempts to convince readers of a certain interpretation of reality (strongly evident in prices paid and comparative injustice). Only a few infographics can be seen as not only persuading but also mobilizing (calling for a specific action). The fact that infographics are not often used for mobilization can be attributed to the history of infographics. As a veteran educational tool, only recently turned into an editorial and persuasive vessel, digital political infographics adopt some political persuasion tactics but do not go as far as attempting to mobilize the masses. However, since the aforementioned literature has found that calls for action can boost virality, this may indicate a trend that will grow along with the rising use of political infographics as discursive tools in the digital sphere.

This infographic shift toward persuasion is evident in the emergent visual conventions relating to emotionality. As mentioned above, contemporary political discourse tends to be overtly emotional and personalized, while infographics were originally intended for succinct, statistical, and fact-oriented communication. This tension was evident in the expression of emotionality in the corpus, which took different forms across the nine infographic types. In cases where persuasion was the rhetorical objective (such as prices paid or comparative injustice), infographics typically included a subtly emotional visualization strategy. A common strategy was the insertion of images of human silhouettes, allowing the infographic to demonstrate that it deals not just with data but also with actual people while maintaining a “safe” façade of data-oriented communication. We suggest that this insertion of emotional and dramatic content may enhance the “spreadable” potential of these infographics, which is necessary in digital settings of political persuasion.

So far, we have looked into the ways in which the new political context has shifted the imagery and functionality of infographics. But we also found evidence of influence in the opposite direction, namely, when politics becomes “infographed.” The most prominent manifestation of this process relates to personalization. In most of the sample, the infographic rhetoric, whether persuasive, mobilizing, or informative, focused on issues rather than candidates. As mentioned above, the current temperament of political campaigning is, however, concerned more with candidates than issues. Yet, only two of the nine categories (horserace and luminaries) seemed to reflect this dominant political trend. As in the case of the emotional appeal, we regard this as another crossbreed between infographic norms and political rapport. As a form of expression that relies on a display of visual information, infographic communication relies on data, which is at the crux of issue-based campaigning. While it isn’t necessarily harder to visualize candidate-centric rhetoric in a political infographic, neither is it the natural vessel, as it would be for issue-based political content. We provisionally conclude that the use of infographics infuses issue-centric discourse into a field saturated with personalization.

Rather than tilting toward political or infographic conventions, the meeting between the two spheres has also created new common grounds, which has been influenced by a third sphere: the digital platform. This third direction is manifested in the appearance of busy compositions, which often hint at “big data,” even when the data sets are actually not that large. Tufte’s (1983) aforementioned definition of infographic excellence associates it with the use of the least amount of ink for the visualization of the largest amount of data. But this was not the case in many of the infographics in our sample. When the narrative aims to persuade or mobilize readers toward a specific goal (particularly in the categories of price quotes and comparative injustice), the infographics tend to comprise multiple data sets organized in dense, highly detailed visualizations, creating an overload of data, visualizations, and chartjunk.

The rhetoric of abundance goes beyond data generation of an “aura of truth” (Kennedy et al., 2016); it creates a sense of a data experience. This is particularly relevant in what we have identified here as configurable interfaces, where the visual representation of data is overlaid with another representation process, in which software re-represents visualizations as part of a multisensory, interactive process. In these instances, users are invited to converse with data—the agent of “truthful” science—rather than with questionable political, journalistic, or private agents. Moreover, immersing readers in information and supplying them with a seemingly personalized experience appeal to the affective, rather than purely cognitive, aspects of infographic consumption. Yet, while this combination of data, materiality, and customization seemingly places control in the hands of the reader, our findings suggest that in practice, such forms involve a rhetoric of participation and very limited scope for user control of the data.

Conclusion

In this article, we presented a typology of the emergent genre of digital political infographics. We found that such texts relate to three main meta-questions, which can further be divided into nine types based on their “data-politics” (as expressed in the amalgamation of narrative, data, and visualization strategies). In addition, we identified four layers of “tactility” in infographics and discussed their implications for the intersection between code, people, and data. An overview of these types showed that the new genre represents a blend between three domains: the veteran, education-oriented infographic, persuasion-oriented political discourse, and features associated with digital communication.

This first venture into digital political infographics has contributed to our understanding of the ways infographics work as persuasive forces in both a narrow and broad sense. In the narrow sense, we identified the addition of emotionality as related to both conventions of political discourse and the world of “shareable” content. More broadly, we have also shown that infographics, particularly interactive ones, incorporate a persuasive power that stems from their alleged ability to “immerse” users in data, even if, in practice, they rarely affect its structure.

While our typology is a product of a specific era and technological context, it reflects deep structural formulations that are likely to endure over time. The main narrative-oriented division between what, who, and how infographics echoes a basic differentiation between political issues, actors, and processes. Moreover, within each of these three major categories, the construction of subcategories reflects fundamental sociocultural dimensions. First, the four who types, which relate to actors, are underscored by various combinations between the basic axes of individuals versus groups and competition versus inequality. Thus, for instance, comparative injustice deals with group-related inequalities, while horserace depicts competition between individuals. Second, what infographics define issues either as given situations (information packets) or as the outcomes of intentional political acts (prices paid and expected consequences). Third, how infographics depict political processes as products of their intrinsic components (anatomy) or as functions of the time through which they operate (temporality). In addition, the depiction of infographics as interfaces which embed various intersections between data, code, and user—as well as the layering of distinct modes of tactility—is likely to be relevant to future formulations. While further developments may generate more infographic subtypes, we expect that these could be located within the broad categorization system offered in this article.

As this study focused on a sample of infographics produced in the English-speaking world (mainly the United States) and disseminated through a specific platform (Twitter), it has limitations that will hopefully be addressed in future research. By taking a comparative approach, further studies would hopefully look into the features and functions of infographics in various sociopolitical contexts and explore their implementations in other social media platforms. A further dimension that should be explored in greater depth relates to the features that make some political infographics more successful than others. While in this study we have seen that in general persuasive infographics entail more emotional cues, future research could explore the association between emotions (and other factors such as complexity or calls for action) and viral success. We hope that the infrastructure laid in this study, which entailed both the identification of distinct rhetorical subgenres and the specific combinations of narrative, data, and visual displays they apply, will assist future endeavors aiming to understand this unique form of communication.