In all fairness, axes needn't start at zero. That's a design choice, not a statistical one. Sometimes correlation can be hard to visualize without translating axes. Of course, there should be a R value in that graph.
I agree that it is a design choice, but it obfuscates the scale and indirectly the significance of the numbers used so I generally find it a bad choice. Here's the same graph with axes to zero: R^2 is 0,44 with n=7 but drops to 0,10 when you leave out the Q1 2016 outlier.
The question is: Is it an outlier? If it's the beginning of a change, then it might not be. As I said above, the range needs to be greater. That's why I think Junk Charts doesn't make an effective point by dropping it. IMO there's nothing wrong with a silly hypothesis, only the poor test of one. 0.44 says it all.when you leave out the Q1 2016 outlier.