This article and data viz, which is based on the John Hopkins data, is useful but I think it could improve by giving the data some context. So for instance, I think the graph describing total deaths compared to other countries is useful because it immediately shows how many more have died in China compared to other parts of the world but it could be easily misinterpreted as well to mean it was wore in China (when we don't know that yet because it has peaked in China but not around the world yet) so without giving it context like the rate of deaths and without being reminded that it began spreading to other parts of the world much later compared to when it first appeared in China, the data could lose it's relevance. I would love to compare China, South Korea or Italy for example, where there are outbreaks, and compare the rate of deaths or contagion (so they'd have to begin at different points in time). I find the map really interesting and obviously makes you question the reasons for spreading (community to community or host country contact etc). I think because most people don't know how viruses are spread, me included, some of this information by JHU doesn't mean what you'd expect it to mean. I think the visualizations need context to explain how viruses are spread compared to others (for instance some researchers found this virus spread twice as fast as the flu.)
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/coronavirus-updating-charts-maps