Here are two pictures of live action versions of Wonder Woman. One is from the recent TV pilot, one is from a new pornographic parody:
The top one is the official version, the one below it is the porn parody.
Dear DC: if the porn parody version looks classier, more true to the original and better-made, just generally less like a low budget porno than your official version, there’s a good chance you’re doing something wrong.
I’ve explained why I think Wonder Woman is a great character here. Yes, it’s problematic to have a powerful feminist icon who runs around in a swimsuit. So … say something interesting about that problem. The current Wonder Woman comic is, after ten years of failed relaunches, actually really rather good, one of the best comics DC are currently putting out. The version of the character in DC’s flagship Justice League title, read by five or six times as many people, is …
… yeah. So which version do the IP farmers run with? Guess.
There’s much talk that both Marvel and DC are ‘IP farms’ these days. The analogy is a good one: farms these days tend to be corporate-owned, massively subsidised, poorly-managed and run with no consideration for long term planning or the quality of the finished product. They want to get a lot of highly-processed product into supermarkets.
But the other thing to note: the makers of the porn version managed to get their product out there. The Wonder Woman pilot did not go to series. The IP farm just has a run of failed harvests.
Oh good grief. OK. I’m not a climate scientist. I’m not a statistician. I don’t really want to enter into a wider debate about climate change. I haven’t verified who drew this graph or when, or whether the information on it is correct. I just want to point out that this graph, which appears in the Mail on Sunday today, which is purported to ‘finally show’ that scientists are wrong about global warming, taken on its own terms, makes the following prediction: ‘5% of the time, the black line will fall outside the pink area’. The black line is consistently in the pink area. 100% of the time. The graph says the exact opposite of what the story says it does.
A quick google of the ‘Global Warming Policy Foundation’ quoted in this story suggests – if the forum, headline and general tone of the article didn’t – that this isn’t simply a case of innocent idiocy.
Here’s the point, though. You can generally prove anything you want with statistics – just add some data or take away some context, or spin the result with some emotional language. Did you know that over 99% of immigrants to the UK have a higher than average number of feet? That’s true. Yesterday, the Nike Air Jordan 13 Retro sold out after just a few hours of release. The headline ‘Are Immigrants Leading to a Shoe Shortage Crisis?’ practically writes itself, doesn’t it?
That graph is meant to be ‘irrefutable’. That’s the best shot. That’s the proton torpedo they think will zoom down the reactor shaft and blow up the whole climate change edifice. It’s an argument presented entirely in their own terms, using only data they presented, framed in language of their choosing. It’s been spun and distorted and shaped as much as they possibly can to get the result they want to get and it still says that the scientists who have consistently and accurately predicted that the world is warming were right. That’s their best shot? It’s rubbish.