Too Much "Tell"

Gifford’s cranioplasty

This graphic is supposed to portray the medical procedure of removing a portion of the skull and later replacing it, or a cranioplasty, but instead I think it misses the point of having an information graphic by relying too heavily on text to explain the procedure instead of actually illustrating the steps. This violates a fundamental journalist’s rule –especially an information graphic journalist’s — to show, not tell. The skull graphic, in my opinion, lacks imagination. It could have been way more detailed and vividly portrayed. For example, in step two of the procedure, when it describes how “surgeons pull back the scalp flap, and the bone fragment or implant is attached with minuscule titanium screws and plates,” this could have been supplemented by a graphic of the surgeon pulling back the flap and securing the fragment with a detailed image of the tiny screws (and does this involve a drill? Is it similar to a drill one would use for a screw?) Needless to say, it is hard to visualize as it reads now.

That said, the graphic does do a good job of anticipating reader questions, such as what a patient does while waiting for swelling of the brain to subside (wear a helmet) and what a replacement fragment is typically made of (special plastic or original bone). It would have simply been nicer to see more visual depictions of the procedure.

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0311giffordscranioplasty.pdf