One thing that strikes me on the Ed Hawkins viz: I am actually not sure the secondary axes were needed. He could have used % of change for each it probably would have worked just the same, more like small multiples with a shared x axis. I might be wrong but that chart still feels quite cluttered and hard to read to me.
What a nuanced breakdown. Nicely done RJ!
One thing that strikes me on the Ed Hawkins viz: I am actually not sure the secondary axes were needed. He could have used % of change for each it probably would have worked just the same, more like small multiples with a shared x axis. I might be wrong but that chart still feels quite cluttered and hard to read to me.
Fascinating idea. And that Ed Hawkins chart is a masterful example. Imagine revealing that on a meeting room screen, coloured line by coloured line...
Agreed—a "slow reveal" graph. Perhaps a topic for a future edition.