Harvard Business School’s Benjamin Edelman has published a study in a recent issue of the Journal of Economic Perspectives that raises some compelling questions:

“Do consumption patterns of online adult entertainment reveal two separate Americas? Or is the consumption of online adult entertainment widespread, regardless of legal barriers, potential for embarrassment, and even religious conviction?”

Edelman, an expert in detecting advertising fraud whose clients include Microsoft, AOL, and a well-entrenched entrepreneur who runs numerous adult-entertainment websites, decided to see if indeed there are significant differences when it comes to consumption patterns of online adult entertainment and geography.

Using credit card data limited to a purchase date and postal zip code, Edelman analyzed two year’s worth of online business activity, controlling for variations across states in internet broadband access and population. Perhaps not so surprisingly, Edelman found comparatively small differences in consumption patterns. However, Utah led the nation averaging 5.47 adult entertainment subscriptions per 1,000 home broadband users. Meanwhile, Montana occupied the other end of the range at just 1.92 subscriptions per 1,000 home broadband users.

Put in another context, the findings reveal a remarkable similarity across the nation:

“The ratio of these extremes is just 2.85—relatively small in comparison to states’ diversity in other respects. For extremes in overall population density (excluding Alaska), compare New Jersey (1,175 people per square mile) to Wyoming (5.25), a ratio of 223:1.

“In truck ownership, compare North Dakota (590 trucks per thousand people) to New York (0.15), a ratio of 3933:1.

“In proportion of the population over 65, compare Pennsylvania (15.2 percent) to Alaska (5.3 percent) and Utah (7.3 percent), ratios of 2.86:1 and 2.08:1.”

Looking at the 2004 National Election Studies data which looked at regions and the number of people who reported attending religious services regularly, Edelman also did not find any statistical differences. Where he did find a difference was that in those areas which reported higher percentages of people regularly attending religious services, Sunday represented a statistically significant smaller proportion of online subscriptions starting on that particular day of the week. However:

“This analysis suggests that, on the whole, those who attend religious services shift their consumption of adult entertainment to other days of the week, despite on average consuming the same amount of adult entertainment as others.”

Edelman also compared the consumption data against other data collected over the last 20 years in the Pew Values Survey. The findings are hardly surprising here as well:

“‘Subscriptions are also more prevalent in states where surveys indicate conservative positions on religion, gender roles, and sexuality. In states where more people agree that ‘Even today miracles are performed by the power of God’ and ‘I never doubt the existence of God,’ there are more subscriptions to this service. Subscriptions are also more prevalent in states where more people agree that ‘I have old-fashioned values about family and marriage’ and ‘AIDS might be God’s punishment for immoral sexual behavior.’”

But the overall tone of the findings suggests a remarkable consistency:

“With interest in online adult entertainment relatively constant across regions, there’s little sign of a major divide.”

Other measures, such as Google Trends, suggest the state has an active interest in pornography. Utah and/or Salt Lake City also has ranked among the top in the nation in searches for “pornography,” “naked girls,” “striptease,” “topless,” “nude,” “strip poker,” “lingerie,” “blonde” and “brunette.”

Edelman’s study doesn’t particularly answer the questions raised at the outset conclusively. After all, he is a market economist, looking at one aspect of a much more complex prism. However, it should give thoughtful pause to us as we consider the rhetorical conduct being applied in our debates particularly on issues of sexuality.

More specifically, in Utah, it is not all that uncommon to hear the discourse occasionally focused on what hate-mongers and fear-laden apostles decry as the preposterously-envisioned aberrant sexual practices of citizens who have been relegated to second-class status when it comes to basic economic and legal rights. And, of course, all spoken in the name of state leaders who anoint themselves as keepers of a unique, exceptional moral crusade protecting the residents against the encroaching tide of deviancy and moral bankruptcy.

Edelman’s study certainly invites contemplating the results of evidence of projection, that psychological defense mechanism which drives a disruptive wedge into what should otherwise be a thoughtful debate. One can only wonder what seductive evils underly the vehement lashing out by state legislators who seek to disparage those who disagree with them.