I disagree with the post, Arguments against Infographics for conveying content. I think that it’s not fair to simply compare the amount of data text and graphics used in info graphics. Following this train of thought Internet would be a much better place if we remover images entirely.
One of the key functions of images is they make things easier to understand. It is especially true for infographics, sure if you create an infographic that present information that can be summarized in a few sentences that’s an awful waste of space, but bear in mind that the original purpose of infographics is to present complex and huge amounts of data in a more comprehensible way. It allows you to quickly see relationships between different values without extensively studying the actual numbers, and makes the whole experience more user-friendly, because infographics are designed not for statistics geeks but for ordinary who need a quick summary of facts. This is why infographics have become increasingly important in marketing, both in traditional press and online.
You can read an interesting article about how infographics affect marketing strategies nowadays here "Infographics – A Powerful Tool To Promote Your Business & Brand". Anyway, I think they are a very useful tool in pretty much the same way a flow charts and graphs are.
Info graphics can be useful. However, the problem is that they are invisible to those who are vision impaired or otherwise unable to see graphics. A lot of info graphics would be better if the text was readable and the images placed using css. Although, as such, they wouldn't be download-able, a website could attach a link to either an image download or pdf.
The thing about images is that they don't always load, and the big ones take a lot of time to load for some people. Not everyone has a good Internet connection; you have to consider that. I'm not against the use of infographics. In fact, I'm a fan of those because they can be a bit entertaining at times, and they can turn one heck of a boring topic into something really interesting because of the use of images. You just have to provide something that would serve as an alternative for those infographics. Don't be afraid to use the classic text content. Oh, and that download link suggestion from Shyflower would be a good idea, too.
isn't it interesting that this article did ~not~ use infographics to make its points
Infographics work in the special places they are designed to work. They are not a substitute for good, short explanatory text.
maybe the author thought that the funny little images were info graphics, but really they aren't. They are just funny little images.
You state yourself why infographics can be a problem. It becomes far to easy to manipulate people if all they see is the summary of the information. You may not like it, but we live in a world where everyone seems to be following an agenda. These people are not above using cherry picked data, or outright manipulated data, to provide the information to an unsuspecting audience; who may take the information presented in an infographic as gospel. I am not saying everyone does this, but as with anything, the ethics must be considered as well.
Infographics have a place, but when they become so prevalent that they replace the logic and discussion that come with the information presented, we all lose something.
Hi jet, welcome to Sitepoint
I agree with you, the "infographic" that stomme posted is a bad example,
I have seen some really well made ones that look beautiful and show the data. They are very effective and I like things that look good, who doesn't?
http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_vdqi is a masterpiece on making good honest charts.
As long as the data is shown accurately and not with gimmicks infographics have a lot of great uses.
However, the problem is that they are invisible to those who are vision impaired or otherwise unable to see graphics.
This really is a small number, and it's not as if people who add infographics are excluding visually impaired users, it's that visually impaired users cannot see visual content (charts). It's unfortunate but it's not neglectful to include content that benefits the vast majority.
The thing about images is that they don't always load
This really isn't a good reason not to use infographics.
I am a little weary of marketing agencies ability to deceive though.
If only the really great products / content out there were the ones with great marketers.
I think infographics should have text transcripts below it in respect to those who have slow Internet connection. Infographics could be interesting or boring, it depends on the content and the style in delivering a content. Personally, I love inforgraphics because I can get the information that I needed in no time.
I found that if you title infographics correctly, the will have some good impact and maybe some light SEO. Thing is, it is always best to surround an infographic with plenty of support text maybe even repeating exactly what the infographic says!
From my point of view info-graphics are best way to share to share your knowledge. It is the best way to share your boring content with creative images and text. I love to read infographics.
If your content is boring to your visitors, why bother sharing it at all?
Infographics live upto the promise "One picture is worth a thousand words". Recently Google's Matt Cutts said that they might discount the infographic links from the ranking factors. What everyone should understand is the fact that infographics is not about the links at all. Infographics is a type of social content that goes virally spread in Facebook, twitter or any other social network. In addition to that, Infographics are the best content to use for Pinterest marketing.
Infographs make users spend time in website and users prefer infographs than contents. But in what way, it benifits? We cant use it for any promotions of products or services.. And need to be cautious about the statistics data and commenting a brand name