Porn study or study porn?

You read the New Scientist porn study [.pdf] story? They wrongly found meaningful right-wingedness in porn consumption patterns. Molly rightly ran a GetReligion debunking of story and study. Good, even though her analysis was more about how some writers don't get math than about how the press doesn't GetReligion. As her illustration (at left) indicates.

Beliefnet Editor-in-Chief Steve Waldman does not appear to us to have read Molly before he wrote. You see, he speculated about the meaning of porn consumption patterns among church-goers, about which the study data tells us essentially nothing (also the principal significance of the study's findings).