Why SF Authors, Why?

So, I was reading The Number of the Beast by Heinlein. It's...not very good. It started out with decent setup, once you get past the fact that yes, all four of the main characters are geniuses and perfectly share Heinlein's fictional version of libertarianism, have no nudity taboos, and are constantly reminding the reader "we're so much more enlightened about sex and nudity than you are". And if you can swallow the handwaved malarkey about shifting universes by pushing on a gyroscope in three directions. Which uses no power and lets you teleport anywhere instantly. But y'know, that'd be okay if it were the main plot thing and then it was all exploring different universes while running from somebody else who can do the exact same thing and is trying to kill them, but that doesn't happen. Not all that much happens, except a lot of re-hashed arguments about the authority of the captain of the ship and other such things that were covered well in Starship Troopers.

Where things really started to fall apart was when they ended up in Oz. And then from there it turned into basically Heinlein writing fanfiction for his favorite authors and himself, and it ends up at a giant interdimensional science fiction convention, with cameos and in-jokes galore, the original plot being long forgot, until it shows back up on the last two pages and I guess is resolved, in a way that makes no real sense.

And oh man, don't even get me started on the women. Now, I've never been a woman, but the women don't ring true at all through most of the book. Like seriously out of whack. And the whole pregnancy fetish thing, man. Sheesh.

Not Heinlein's best work, no. And I'm not sure I buy any of the arguments I've found via wikipedia about it being written to help lead people to good writing or things, it really just reminds me of fanfic, written for the appreciation of his friends. And published because he was Robert Heinlein.

Also, many SF authors seem to turn into dirty old men. Or dirty middle aged men. Some more gracefully than others. (Compare, say, Asimov's book of dirty limericks to any recent Piers Anthony.)

"New" Comic

Okay, I already posted about it over at snarkoleptics, but I wanted to link it here too. Dresden Codak is a really pretty comic, and nifty. I don't really think I need to say any more about it.

Maybe This is Stupid

But shouldn't "objective journalism" mean not just reporting what someone said, but actually looking into the claims they make and reporting if they're objectively true or not? In science, in politics, in whatever. The first isn't journalism, it's just transcription.