Layout is part of the argument
The poster’s numbers are correct, but the visual specification misleads. Starting bars at 8 makes the displayed heights 4, 7 and 1. The bar for 15 therefore looks seven times as tall as the bar for 9, although 15 inquiries is not seven times 9 inquiries. For this magnitude comparison, start the bars at zero and use a shared scale.
The sequence 12, 15, 9 also does not show steadily growing demand. A headline about an explosion invites an inference the three observations do not support. Repairing the axis without repairing the headline leaves the larger argument misleading.
A photograph contributes evidence only when its provenance and relevance support that use. An unrelated lunchtime crowd cannot document evening conditions. You may use an explicitly labeled illustration to explain a situation, but it must not masquerade as a record of the sampled events.
Build your storyboard as an ordered description: what readers notice first, which evidence they encounter next, where they see its limits, and what action follows. Give the caption enough information to travel with the visual. Tiny limitations separated from a dramatic headline are unlikely to correct the initial impression.
Provide a complete text equivalent containing the exact counts, sampling conditions and proposed action. “A chart of demand” is not enough. On a narrow screen, keep the limitation close to the claim even if decoration must disappear. The draft workspace supports a textual design specification; it does not render or verify a chart automatically.
