What is the purpose of scrollytelling? 

Scrollytelling is a storytelling technique in which text or visual elements, such as pictures, maps, or graphics, appear, disappear, or change as a reader scrolls through a website. This format is useful for authors who want to guide the reader through a clear narrative arc or a series of interconnected arguments that work well in a sequence, namely:

• The evolution of a crisis, including changes in geography, fluctuations in activity over time, and the emergence of new actors, among other trends.

  • Example: Syria: A decade of flight.

• Zooming in on specific events to exemplify or provide evidence of a larger phenomenon.

  • Example: I fantasmi del Baltico. Cavi sottomarini tranciati, incidenti e sabotaggi: per i Paesi Nato dell’area si tratta di operazioni di guerra ibrida lanciate dalla Russia. (The ghosts of the Baltic Sea. Severed submarine cables, accidents, and sabotage: for NATO countries in the area, these are hybrid warfare operations launched by Russia.) 

• The causes and consequences of a trend.

• A series of developments that exemplify or explain the details behind a larger trend that will be presented later or in a different format (e.g., a written report). 

  • Example: ‘The Invisibles’: A Cuban asylum seeker’s dangerous odyssey

• A deep dive into a specific topic that requires heavy usage of multimedia and data visualizations.

  • Example: Bodies in the canals. Satellite imagery, whistleblowers, and videos reveal ethnically targeted killings by Sudan’s army. 

How can I assess if scrollytelling is the best option for my analysis proposal?

As this format is interactive and visually appealing, it might be tempting to use scrollytelling when the opportunity arises, or to think of it as a substitute for a lengthy report. However, it is essential to keep in mind that this is effective only for specific topics and argument structures. Using it solely for its visual perks may result in a product that fails to convey a clear message.

If you are unsure if your analysis proposal could fit into a scrollytelling format, use this checklist to assess the situation: 

• The main argument is clear and concise enough to be developed across a few slides with minimal text.

• Your proposal fits into one of the narrative arc examples outlined in the previous section.

• The arguments are interconnected: to understand C, the reader must have engaged with arguments A and B before. 

• Either because they follow a chronological order, a narrative sequence, or something similar to a three-act structure (setup, confrontation, resolution).

• The evidence you plan to use is mostly visual and requires extensive use of maps, charts, pictures, and videos. 

• The main target audience is likely to engage in the format, and the format works for your desired dissemination strategy. For instance, if you aim to elicit policy engagement opportunities, scrollytelling may be at odds with the expectations of your target readership.

While it is not a requirement for all points to be checked, at the very least, points 2 and 3 are necessary for scrollytelling to be appropriate for your case.

What scrollytelling format is more suitable for my analysis proposal? 

There are two ways in which scrollytelling can be incorporated into analysis: as a standalone piece or as a part of a larger “traditional” report.

As a standalone piece

This requires conceptualizing and producing an outline of a piece intended to be delivered in a mostly scrollable format. It does not mean authors cannot incorporate text into it, but scrolly features should make up the majority of the content.

As a section within a written report

If the author is interested in making certain arguments more understandable to readers, and if one (or more) arguments or sections outline a clear narrative arc as explained before, then it can be replaced by scrollytelling and incorporated into a larger report. In these cases, scrolly features cannot make up for the majority of the content.

For example, the paragraph below from this report explains how violence against political figures in Ecuador has evolved between 2018 and 2025.

Between when ACLED began covering Ecuador in 2018 and 2021, there were 30 events of violence against elected officials, government workers, candidates, and their relatives, which led to the death of five people. Things changed in 2022: In the year leading up to the local elections on 5 February 2023, the number of events went up to 89. This violence further accelerated during the August snap elections: ACLED records similar levels of violence in the five months between Lasso’s call for early elections and the presidential runoff. During the two electoral processes, 99 people were killed in incidents of violence against political figures, including presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio. Prosecutors believe that Los Lobos gang members carried out his murder, but the plotters of the attack have yet to be identified. 

While much of the violence targeting political figures had a clear link with the electoral process in 2022 and 2023, it has since become endemic. In fact, monthly violence against political figures remained high during the 2025 electoral process, which can be said to be the most violent since ACLED began covering the country in 2018, with over 140 events.

This is how it would look as a scrollytelling. These paragraphs are suitable for presentation in this format because the arguments follow a chronological order.

Workflow

Scrollytelling products follow a similar conceptualization, drafting, and reviewing process to other analysis pieces, but require close collaboration with visualizers throughout the process. The main difference lies in the drafting process, where authors and visualizers must submit a storyboard, which is an adapted version of the draft. 

For cases when scrollytelling will be incorporated into a larger analysis output, authors must complete two additional steps during the outline development phase: 

1. Author(s) check with the Associate Analysis Coordinator to discuss the suitability of having a section in scrollytelling format.

2. Within the outline, authors must include a narrative arc that they want to develop using scrollytelling. To write the narrative arc, please follow the instructions on the scrollytelling outline template.

3. The Head of Analysis, Analysis Manager, and leading editor will approve, suggest changes, or reject the scrollytelling proposal during their review.

The following workflow applies when scrollytelling is a standalone project: 

1. Author(s) meet with the Associate Analysis Coordinator to discuss the suitability of the format for their analysis proposal. Developing a scrollytelling piece is also a laborious process for visualizers, so this step will help ensure there is capacity to support the timelines required.

2. The author(s) and Associate Analysis Coordinator arrange a kick-off project call with all relevant stakeholders: reviewers and approvers, multimedia team, etc.

3. Author(s) develop an outline using the scrollytelling outline template. 

4. The outline undergoes reviews by the Head of Analysis, the Associate Analysis Manager, and the lead editor. Once approved, the drafting process begins.

5. The draft development must begin with a concept development meeting, where the author, the designer, and the multimedia team (if relevant) discuss how to translate the outline into an actual scrollytelling piece.

6. The author and the designer fill out the scrollytelling storyboard, where they define the content (text and visuals) to be featured in each slide of the piece. 

7. Once finalized, both the storyboard and the scrollytelling first draft are reviewed by the secondary editor and the Associate Analysis Manager.  

8. The approved version is embedded into a test landing page on ACLED’s website and sent for final approval to the Head of Analysis.

Further readings: 

• Analysis Guide

• Style Guide 

• Glossary 

• Visual Style Guide