a sexy, sexy post

Because life is short.

--A researcher at Harvard has reportedly found that "eight of the top ten porn-watching states voted Republican in the last presidential election." Actually, if you look at the study itself (always a good idea!), you'll see that "... these adult entertainment subscription patterns show a remarkable consistency...With interest in online adult entertainment relatively constant across regions, there’s little sign of a major divide." Either way, it seems that lots of people enjoy porn, so maybe going after it isn't such a political winner.

--Did you know that kangaroos have three vaginas? (Well, the females do, anyway.) You're not allowed to bring this up in the Michigan legislature.

--This has pretty much been my experience in the neighborhood this summer, too. I don't mind.


Bike Bubba said...

It could be that conservative states are more perverse, or it could be that other states which use less online porn have more "non-internet" venues for the same.

Put differently, I'd have to guess that it might be a little more difficult to find a shop featuring porn in Utah than in many other states. So maybe whatever correlation there is is simply substitute goods?

Brian said...

Maybe. I have no idea who actually goes to a store to get porn anymore.

I also can't imagine consuming enough to warrant a subscription. But that's me.

I really do think the general homogeneity across states is more telling than the particulars of small variations, but of course the former get more airplay.

Bike Bubba said...

I also have no idea who goes, but I do know that the articles you linked suggested that online is only about 30% of the market. So you would definitely have to consider substitute goods.

And yes, one analysis got more play, and the question of substitute goods never got asked. Which is to indicate that (a) journalists don't understand economics and (b) journalists tend towards one political narrative over another.

We might add (c) peer reviewers aren't particularly strong on economics, either, since they appear to have missed the question of substitute goods as well.