The Dish

Felix Salmon describes how most journalists read economics papers:

[W]e generally have no ability or inclination to try to understand the details of the formulae and regression analyses, so we confine ourselves to reading the stuff in English, and work on the general assumption that the mathematics is reasonably solid

An economics PhD student comments:

[U]nderstanding the math lets you realize how narrow the analysis is and how stylized the world depicted by the model has to be for its conclusions to follow. As descriptions of the world, they’re metaphors; but without the math it’s hard to show someone where the metaphor holds and where it’s just an analogy not to be taken literally.

Moorea, French Polynesia, 12.30 pm

They are relying on his position as head of state to protect him from suits related to his involvement in the cover-up and enabling of child- and teen-molestation by priests under his authority.

E.D. Kain protests:

Thinking about this some more, it appears Andrew has missed my point entirely. The aesthetic argument was not my defense of Benedict at all. My defense is simply this: the Pope is innocent until proven guilty and nobody has in any way proved that the Pope has had any role to play in covering up sexual abuse in the Church. Yet people would hang him sans trial just the same. There is only assertion and speculation, yet that – apparently – is enough. Thus, calling for his resignation is not at all about ‘accountability’ but rather about finding a scapegoat or as a personal political vendetta.

The aesthetic question was an attempt to explain why people so dislike Benedict and so loved John Paul II when the two men are so similar in every conceivable way. My explanation? They find this Pope sinister looking, unlike his predecessor. (Andrew surely links to plenty of sinister looking photos of the Holy Father…)

"Nobody has in any way proved that the Pope has had any role to play in covering up sexual abuse in the Church"? Where has Kain been?

The evidence linking Benedict XVI to protecting child rapists in the Murphy and Hullerman cases is now thoroughly laid out in public. This is the source of the new wave of stories – from Wisconsin to Munich. In so far as proof is possible in these old cases covered with bureaucratic layers of deniability, the proof now exists. As for me, I never let JPII off the hook either. His protection of Maciel was vile, blind and possibly corrupted by the vast amounts of money the cult-leader hauled in for the church.

A photo gallery chronicling the growing dialect of "Teabonics." Or, as Ta-Nehisi would say, "It's like they're proud of being ignorant."

Joyner is confused:

First, why would Fox promote a show based on interviews that weren’t conducted for that show?  Second, why would Fox debut a show for its new rock star host using stale interviews?  Third, while I’ve chided Palin for becoming a pop culture celebrity rather than a serious politico, why in the world would they juxtapose her with LL Cool J and Toby Keith rather than, say, military heroes or hockey moms or someone else that’s more representative of her base appeal?

Roger Ailes has given the answer to all of this: ratings. He has no values, no standards, no professional criteria apart from ratings.

TechCrunch is keeping track of today's internet pranks. This one gets an "A-":

Google UK is offering an app for the Android that will translate animal speech. As the site explains: “Translate for Animals is an application for Android phones that recognises and transcribes words and phrases that are common to a species, like cats for example. To develop Translate for Animals, we worked closely with many of the world’s top language synthesis teams, and with leaders in the field of animal cognitive linguistics, including senior fellows at the Bodleian Library in Oxford.” Video included.

Harold Pollack goes out on a limb:

Because it is so easy to find bad reporting and public stupidity, it is easy to overlook something. Press coverage of health care reform was the most careful, most thorough, and most effective reporting of any major story, ever.

Pareene translates this Larry King clip:

See, if the kids were post-pubescent—12 or 13, according to Bill [Donohue]—then it's not pedophilia anymore, it is homosexuality. And that means it's not the fault of the church, it is the fault of Gays. (Sinead was there because she wrote a very good editorial about abuses in Ireland that the Vatican was complicit in. It ran in the Washington Post even though O'Connor never once wrote a speech for George W. Bush.)

I wish we could go back in time and have the 1990 cast of Saturday Night Live reenact this video.