"rethinking Mormons And Porn"

[Scott Lloyd]

I found this in a link from Daniel Peterson's blog.

 

It exposes another case of bad or dubious statistics being used to defame Utah and Mormonism, in this case on the topic of porn consumption.

 

Turns out that the instance in Utah is very probably not nearly as bad as earlier thought, notwithstanding the ruminations of Joanna Brooks and other bloggers. In fact, these new numbers point to an opposite conclusion from the earlier study: that Utah and other states with large percentages of Mormons have abnormally low rates of porn use.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Bikeemikey]

I found this in a link from Daniel Peterson's blog.

It exposes another case of bad or dubious statistics being used to defame Utah and Mormonism, in this case on the topic of porn consumption.

Turns out that the instance in Utah is very probably not nearly as bad as earlier thought, notwithstanding the ruminations of Joanna Brooks and other bloggers.

Looks good...

Might also be the case that the last five years of porn avoidance emphasis has started to pay off.

I'd be curious about a similar regression analysis on the 2009 study.

However, we shouldn't really draw to many conclusions from any of these studies. The studies drawn from the 2009 study are speculative... The studies drawn from this one are speculative to.

[changed]

That is frustrating the first study was so widely sited, and yet so sketchy of a study.... now we'll never know if all the "don't do porn" talks changed usage over the last 5 years, or if there was never a huge problem to begin with.

[why me]

I found this in a link from Daniel Peterson's blog.

 

It exposes another case of bad or dubious statistics being used to defame Utah and Mormonism, in this case on the topic of porn consumption.

 

Turns out that the instance in Utah is very probably not nearly as bad as earlier thought, notwithstanding the ruminations of Joanna Brooks and other bloggers. In fact, these new numbers point to an opposite conclusion from the earlier study: that Utah and other states with large percentages of Mormons have abnormally low rates of porn use.

I think that the myth of the use of porn in Utah will never be debunked because it works for the exmembers or the critics of the church. They will roll out the numbers to support that mormons in Utah love porn.

[Scott Lloyd]

Looks good...

Might also be the case that the last five years of porn avoidance emphasis has started to pay off.

I'd be curious about a similar regression analysis on the 2009 study.

However, we shouldn't really draw to many conclusions from any of these studies. The studies drawn from the 2009 study are speculative... The studies drawn from this one are speculative to.

For reasons detailed on the blog, the new study is far more reliable than the one in 2009.

 

And for as long as I've been alive, the Church of Jesus Christ has urged members to avoid porn like the plague. It's unrealistic to think that it has only been in the last five years that this has begun to have an effect, bucking the trend of an increasingly more permissive society.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

I think that the myth of the use of porn in Utah will never be debunked because it works for the exmembers or the critics of the church. They will roll out the numbers to support that mormons in Utah love porn.

I wonder whether Brooks and others who highlighted the 2009 study will now revisit the subject. Or are they going to ignore it because it doesn't suit their agenda?

Edited April 19, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[thatjimguy]

I find it funny that when the original stats came out people were defending with the idea "That doesn't reflect Mormons! Not all in Utah are Mormon" and the like.

 

Of course, now, that the stats are in the other direction. We have headlines stating that because it is Utah, it does reflect Mormons.

[BlueDreams]

I find it funny that when the original stats came out people were defending with the idea "That doesn't reflect Mormons! Not all in Utah are Mormon" and the like.

 

Of course, now, that the stats are in the other direction. We have headlines stating that because it is Utah, it does reflect Mormons.

 

That's not what the article said. Look at it again. It shows correlation between a significant deccrease in porn us by an increase of mormon population. So this data is more robust in actually reflecting potential mormon porn use than the initial study. It doesn't pretend to be the end-all-be-all of studies, but does throw a major monkey wrench into the use of the previous data to infer various thing about LDS porn use.

 

With luv,

BD

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I found this in a link from Daniel Peterson's blog.

 

It exposes another case of bad or dubious statistics being used to defame Utah and Mormonism, in this case on the topic of porn consumption.

 

Turns out that the instance in Utah is very probably not nearly as bad as earlier thought, notwithstanding the ruminations of Joanna Brooks and other bloggers. In fact, these new numbers point to an opposite conclusion from the earlier study: that Utah and other states with large percentages of Mormons have abnormally low rates of porn use.

How do tract something like that anyway?

[Bikeemikey]

For reasons detailed on the blog, the new study is far more reliable than the one in 2009.

And for as long as I've been alive, the Church of Jesus Christ has urged members to avoid porn like the plague. It's unrealistic to think that it has only been in the last five years that this has begun to have an effect, bucking the trend of an increasingly more permissive society.

Just for the sake of semantic clarification... The old study was a published study and the new data is simply data that has been "analyzed"... Note that the link to the analysis in the blog responds with and error, not information.

While the information provided on the blog is very insightful the strongest conclusion we can draw is that the website underpinning the 2009 data is more frequented by Utah than the "pornhub" site (the source of the new data).

It is not fully accurate to refer to both the 2009 publication and the 2014 data as comparable.

It is equally as inaccurate to suggest that the 2009 report would be suggestive of mormon pornography viewing trends.

For a study to be statistically significant The top 5 content providers would need to be analyzed and compared not just on a state usage pattern but preferably on a country or municipal level (zip code would be best).

It is equally disingenuous to proclaim this new data is proof that Mormons are low users just as it was to say that Mormons are high users based on the 2009 study.

Different websites market to different regions, hence the need for the top five or so websites as a broad based sample.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Bikeemikey

[Calm]

Looks good...

Might also be the case that the last five years of porn avoidance emphasis has started to pay off.

I'd be curious about a similar regression analysis on the 2009 study.

However, we shouldn't really draw to many conclusions from any of these studies. The studies drawn from the 2009 study are speculative... The studies drawn from this one are speculative to.

The previous study had problems from the beginning iirc, been awhile since I examine what it was actually measuring. This one identifies what it is doing in a much better format plus the author applied some worth while further analysis tools and while there should still be reservations, this is a much better constructed study and therefore will likely have higher reliability.

At the very least, it should stop people from making the unquestioning claim about porn use for the past 5 years.

[Calm]

That is frustrating the first study was so widely sited, and yet so sketchy of a study.... now we'll never know if all the "don't do porn" talks changed usage over the last 5 years, or if there was never a huge problem to begin with.

Was there a significant change in the amount or were people just noticing them...I ask because people have been complaining about porn talks for decades.

[Calm]

I find it funny that when the original stats came out people were defending with the idea "That doesn't reflect Mormons! Not all in Utah are Mormon" and the like.

Of course, now, that the stats are in the other direction. We have headlines stating that because it is Utah, it does reflect Mormons.

was the former study the one that broke down use by county? Is so, my memory says it demonstrated one thing and that was greatest use was in counties that had higher density of nonmormons.

If so, then pointing that out had value then just as pointing out the additional analysis shows lower levels of porn in higher density of LDS. Do you think that such findins should be ignored for some reason?

Edited April 19, 2014 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Just for the sake of semantic clarification... The old study was a published study and the new data is simply data that has been "analyzed"... Note that the link to the analysis in the blog responds with and error, not information.

While the information provided on the blog is very insightful the strongest conclusion we can draw is that the website underpinning the 2009 data is more frequented by Utah than the "pornhub" site (the source of the new data).

It is not fully accurate to refer to both the 2009 publication and the 2014 data as comparable.

It is equally as inaccurate to suggest that the 2009 report would be suggestive of mormon pornography viewing trends.

For a study to be statistically significant The top 5 websites would need to be analyzed and compared not just on a state usage pattern but preferably on a country or municipal level (zip code would be best).

It is equally disingenuous to proclaim this new data is proof that Mormons are low users just as it was to say that Mormons are high users based on the 2009 study.

Different websites market to different regions, hence the need for the top five or so websites as a broad based sample.

Since the original website was not identified we have no way of determine the accuracy of that claim or examining reasons why it might be so.

I agree with the suggestions on how to make do useful research.

[Bikeemikey]

The previous study had problems from the beginning iirc, been awhile since I examine what it was actually measuring. This one identifies what it is doing in a much better format plus the author applied some worth while further analysis tools and while there should still be reservations, this is a much better constructed study and therefore will likely have higher reliability.

At the very least, it should stop people from making the unquestioning claim about porn use for the past 5 years.

The 2009 report was a published study...

The stuff we are talking about now in 2014 is a basic data dump of viewing stats, a very good blogpost about the stats and a link to further analysis that doesn't work.

Data is not a report. Nor is a blogpost, however good the same as a published report. The 2009 report is not actually a bad report, it has however been horribly misused.

Was the 2009 report perfect, no, it had massive limitations. However, the point of the 2009 report was to highlight porn viewing habits. Based on the data sets avaliable Utah had high viewing ratios.

This days far more about the source data than anything else and has always been foolishness to draw conclusions about LDS porn viewing habits from the 2009 report, just as it is from the 2014 data.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Bikeemikey

[why me]

I wonder whether Brooks and others who highlighted the 2009 study will now revisit the subject. Or are they going to ignore it because it doesn't suit their agenda?

I don't know. But our friends on the antimormon sites will ignore it because it doesn't suit their agenda. I have always doubted the Mormon Utah porn addiction problem. One reason I doubted it was because when one pays for porn it shows up on the credit card. And I have no idea just how an expense could be explained away regardless if it is listed as something innocent on bill. Wives that I know go over the credit card bill quite carefully. No husband could get away with paying for porn.

[Bikeemikey]

I think that the myth of the use of porn in Utah will never be debunked because it works for the exmembers or the critics of the church. They will roll out the numbers to support that mormons in Utah love porn.

There is no "myth" of porn in Utah... There is however porn use in Utah.

The 2009 study showed remarkable similarity in viewing across a large array of areas. Utah had a high number of viewers per broadband hookup.

That's a fact.

It is still not accurate to draw mormon viewing habits from this report.

[why me]

There is no "myth" of porn in Utah... There is however porn use in Utah.

The 2009 study showed remarkable similarity in viewing across a large array of areas. Utah had a high number of viewers per broadband hookup.

That's a fact.

It is still not accurate to draw mormon viewing habits from this report.

Not quite. First, Í have no idea just how they would conclude that it were Mormons viewing it. Second, if it is paying for porn via credit card, these Mormons must be single because it would be very difficult to explain such a bill to the spouse, especially if the bill comes once a month. I am not bothered by Mormons watching porn. It just shows that Mormons are not perfect or that they are as perfect as anyone else. Porn has become a natural part of life with the mainstream media glorifying porn stars now. And it does show that the GAs are right on target in warning against it.

[Bikeemikey]

Since the original website was not identified we have no way of determine the accuracy of that claim or examining reasons why it might be so.

I agree with the suggestions on how to make do useful research.

The publication gave some interesting insight. For example... Porn consumption is higher in areas with more youthful populations. Utah has a higher than average birthdate (or it did a few years ago when I last looked) as well as a younger than average population.

Based on the 2009 article it is more likely demographic age had a role in porn viewing than religious affiliation.

In fact, the article specially said religious adherence only impact the day porn was viewed, not if it was viewed.

[Bikeemikey]

Not quite. First, Í have no idea just how they would conclude that it were Mormons viewing it. Second, if it is paying for porn via credit card, these Mormons must be single because it would be very difficult to explain such a bill to the spouse, especially if the bill comes once a month. I am not bothered by Mormons watching porn. It just shows that Mormons are not perfect or that they are as perfect as anyone else. Porn has become a natural part of life with the mainstream media glorifying porn stars now. And it does show that the GAs are right on target in warning against it.

You obviously did not read the 2009 article. The article said nothing about Mormons watching porn!

It simply showed Utah viewing was high.

It was other people making claims the article never made linking this to Mormonism.

[Bikeemikey]

I wonder whether Brooks and others who highlighted the 2009 study will now revisit the subject. Or are they going to ignore it because it doesn't suit their agenda?

The 2009 article was a published report. So far we have a data dump and a blogpost. The 2009 data and the 2014 data are likely not even from the same adult entertainment provider. One does not disprove the other, it may show however that one provider has more of a footprint in Utah than another.

[thatjimguy]

That's not what the article said. Look at it again. It shows correlation between a significant deccrease in porn us by an increase of mormon population. So this data is more robust in actually reflecting potential mormon porn use than the initial study. It doesn't pretend to be the end-all-be-all of studies, but does throw a major monkey wrench into the use of the previous data to infer various thing about LDS porn use.

 

With luv,

BD

 

 

"In fairness, we cannot be sure that Pornhub.com users are representative of the industry overall."

 

Both sides see what they want to see. That's pretty much what I am saying.

[Bikeemikey]

That is frustrating the first study was so widely sited, and yet so sketchy of a study.... now we'll never know if all the "don't do porn" talks changed usage over the last 5 years, or if there was never a huge problem to begin with.

So why was the study sketchy?

Is it because people misunderstood what it said and made up conclusions the report did no make and does not support?

It seems strange that the misuse of information makes the information "sketchy".

The report is solid. Based on the information from the service provider who shared information Utah had the highest rate of porn "subscription" in the USA.

There is no way to make any statements about mormon porn viewing habits from the 2009 report. There is also no way to make accurate mormon porn viewing habits from the 2014 data.

[Bikeemikey]

"In fairness, we cannot be sure that Pornhub.com users are representative of the industry overall."

Both sides see what they want to see. That's pretty much what I am saying.

Fully agree.

[Bikeemikey]

That's not what the article said. Look at it again. It shows correlation between a significant deccrease in porn us by an increase of mormon population. So this data is more robust in actually reflecting potential mormon porn use than the initial study. It doesn't pretend to be the end-all-be-all of studies, but does throw a major monkey wrench into the use of the previous data to infer various thing about LDS porn use.

With luv,

BD

Just an FYI... The top 500 porn sites only have about 56% of online porn viewing activity (compared with the top 500 retail sites controlling about 78% of online retail). This is from the 2009 study.

Each major provider controls many many porn viewing websites.

Activity from one porn website is good if I was wanting to advertise to subscribers of that website but statistically meaningless for anything else.

To make claims about mormon porn viewing activity makes us on par with those who made claims about mormon porn viewing activity when the 2009 report came out...

We would be making stuff up.