Visualizations can be an incredibly powerful tool for communicating data. Data visualizations can summarize large data sets into one view, allow for easy comparisons between variables, and show trends or relationships in data that cannot be seen by looking at the raw data. Empirical information and by extension data visualizations are often seen as objective and honest. Unfortunately, data visualizations are susceptible to errors that may make them misleading. When visualizations are made for public audiences that do not have the statistical training or subject matter expertise to identify misleading or misrepresented data, these errors can have very negative effects. There is a good deal of research on how best to create guidelines for creating or systems for evaluating data visualizations. Many of the existing guidelines have contradicting approaches to designing visuals or they stress that best practices depend on the context. The goal of this work is to define the guidelines for making visualizations in the context of a public audience and show how context-specific guidelines can be used to effectively evaluate and critique visualizations. The guidelines created here are a starting point to show that there is a need for best practices that are specific to public media. Data visualization for the public lies at the intersection of statistics, graphic design, journalism, cognitive science, and rhetoric. Because of this, future conversations to create guidelines should include representatives of all these fields.

Over the past twenty years, the United States has experienced what Dr. Thomas Philippon calls "The Great Reversal," or a slow drift away from the free market competition which defined the American economy for the last century, towards an increasingly oligopolistic consolidation of market power. What does this mean? For the average American, prices have increased, wages remain stagnant, quality has declined, and the variety of goods has diminished. The reason? The growing political power of incumbent firms, who use their established economic power to influence the political process in their favor, towards high barriers to entry and decreased antitrust scrutiny, through lobbying and the financing of campaigns. Or have they? "The Great Reversal," and hypotheses like it, are far from a consensus... This Thesis is a meta study of the literature surrounding domestic competition in the United States and the impact that the lobbying activity of industry leaders has on said competition. Analyzing over 20 papers covering economics, political science, and political economy, this Thesis argues that domestic competition in the United States has indeed declined over the past two decades and that the growing political power of firms, rather than "unique" technological or structural changes in the economy, has caused this drift away from free markets. Using this analysis, this Thesis further suggests a few solutions to "The Great Reversal" and restoring competition in the American economy.