Well, it is and it isn’t. It depends which gadgets you’re talking about, and for what reasons.

Can a cellphone really interfere with a plane’s systems and avionics? The answer is that it’s highly unlikely, but possible. That’s not the answer you want, I know, but like almost everything in commercial aviation, it depends. For example, although a plane’s electronics are designed with interference in mind, if the shielding is old or faulty there’s a greater potential for trouble.

Even if not actively engaged with a call, a cellphone’s power-on mode dispatches bursts of potentially harmful energy. For this reason, they must be placed in the proverbial “off position” prior to taxiing, as requested during the never tedious pre-takeoff safety briefing. The policy is clearly stated, but obviously unenforced, and we assume the risks are minimal or else phones would be collected or inspected visually rather than relying on the honor system. I’d venture to guess at least half of all cellular phones, whether inadvertently or out of laziness, are left on during flight. That’s about a million phones a day in the United States alone. If indeed this was a recipe for disaster, I think we’d have more evidence by now.

That being stated, phones may have had a role in at least two serious incidents. The key word being “may,” as interference is extraordinarily difficult to trace or prove. Some blame a phone for the unsolved crash of a Crossair regional plane in Switzerland in 2000, claiming that spurious transmissions confused the plane’s autopilot. In another case, a regional jet was forced to make an emergency landing after a fire alarm was triggered by a ringing phone in the luggage compartment.

Those are extremes. What would interference normally look like? You imagine a hapless passenger hitting the Send button when suddenly the airplane flips over or nose-dives into the ground, when in reality it’s liable to be subtle and transient. The electronic architecture of a modern jetliner is vast, to say the least, and most irregularities aren’t exactly heart-stoppers – a warning flag that flickers for a moment and then goes away; a course line that briefly goes askew. Or something unseen. I’m occasionally asked if I have ever personally witnessed cellular interference in a cockpit.  Not to my knowledge — but I can’t say for sure. Planes are large and complicated; minor, fleeting malfunctions of this or that component aren’t uncommon, and their causes are often impossible to determine.

It’s possible that airlines are using the mere possibility of technical complications as a means of avoiding the social implications of allowing cellular conversations on planes. The minute it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that phones are safe, a percentage of fliers will demand the right to use them, pitting one angry group of travelers against another, with carriers stuck in the middle. If, indeed, airlines are playing this game, count me among those sympathetic, and who hope the prohibition stays in place — not out of technical concerns, but for the sake of human decency and some bloody peace and quiet. The sensory bombardment inside airports is overwhelming enough.  The airplane cabin is a last refuge of relative silence (so long as there isn’t a baby wailing). Let’s keep it that way.

As for the restrictions pertaining to computers, iPods and certain other devices during takeoffs and landings, this has nothing to do with electronic interference. In theory, a poorly shielded notebook computer can emit harmful energy, but the main reason laptops need to be put away is to prevent them from becoming high-speed projectiles in the event of an impact or sudden deceleration, and from hampering an evacuation. Your computer is a piece of luggage, and luggage needs to be stowed so it doesn’t kill somebody or get in the way. The same holds for iPads and Kindles. Sure, a book can weigh as much as a Kindle, but this is where the line is drawn.

In the case of iPods and the like, it’s about the headphones and the ability to hear instructions from the crew. During takeoffs and landings, you need to be able to hear and follow instructions if there’s an emergency. That’s hard to do if you’ve got your MP3 player cranked to 11. Similar to the requirement to raise your window shades, it’s in the interest of situational awareness. Excessive?  Maybe, and after all flight attendants don’t go around waking people up or quizzing them on evacuation procedures. But what the heck, it’s a slight safety enhancement that doesn’t cost anything.

The rules are confusing and confounding. It’s also true that carriers have made a bad situation worse through random and sometimes contradictory enforcement of policy, and/or by enacting blanket bans on all devices, including those — like noise-canceling headphones — that are clearly not a threat.  Sure this makes the rules simpler and easier to enforce. It also encourages people to ignore or surreptitiously break them, and it nourishes people’s suspicions that everything an airline tells you is a lie.

Which brings us back to Alec Baldwin. “One of the big changes,” he wrote the other day in an apologetic blog entry on Huffington Post, “is in the increase of the post-9/11, paramilitary bearing of much of the air travel business. September 11th was a horrific day in the airline industry, yet in the wake of that event, I believe carriers and airports have used that as an excuse to make the air travel experience as inelegant as possible.”

There is truth to that. All passengers deserve dignity, straight answers, courtesy and respect; I can’t make excuses for crew members who fail to understand this, or who use the regulatory powers granted to them abusively.

On the other hand, believe me — it takes some pretty bad behavior to get yourself thrown off a plane.  And while the rules aren’t always understood, mostly they are there for good reason. You’re expected and obliged to follow them.

If you are under the age of 18, I am not here to talk to you today. But that doesn’t mean you are not important. Go tell your parents how much you liked my cameo in the “SpongeBob SquarePants” film, or as the voice of Makunga the Lion in “Madagascar 2.”

So now that we all here have established that you know who I am, I would like to officially announce that I plan to run for mayor of New York City. (Wait for murmurs to die down.)

I know this may come as a shock to some of you, because you may consider me this famous Hollywood big shot, and New York is full of very real, authentic people. We all know what happens when you try to get a guy from California to lead New Yorkers into anything: You get shows like “Entourage.” I also want to clarify that I don’t believe that Ronald Reagan was the greatest president who ever lived, or that “Reaganing” should be a term associated with success, despite what my fictional character on “30 Rock” — who I must again remind you is fictional, and does not share my political viewpoints, although everything else about us is pretty much exactly the same — says.

As to my critics, who have already voiced their issues with my potential run, I would just like to say that I am neither “Trumping” nor “Palining” the situation to get a raise for “30 Rock.” I fully intend to leave that show after my contract expires in 2012, so to better focus on serving you, the good people of New York. You guys have all seen my commercials for how much I love this city, right?

I am also a huge Yankees fan, as evidenced by those other commercials in which that freakishly tall blond boy from “The Office” and I have a good-natured sparring over our respective baseball teams.

I know those two advertisements on their own might not convince you that I love this great city. There have been worries that I am too elitist for voters, since I live in a nice penthouse apartment. You know who else lives in that building? Michael J. Fox. Are you going to tell me that you wouldn’t vote for that man if he were running? Are your hearts made of stone?

Where do you think King Mayor Michael Bloomberg sleeps, anyhow? In a tent outside of the Wendy’s on 42nd Street? That’s just a Michael Bloomberg impersonator; don’t be fooled. These are the things you get to know as a native New Yorker.

Irregardless — which I know isn’t a real word but just sounds better on the tongue, doesn’t it? — I have drawn up a couple of campaign promises to win over those of you who still doubt that I am … truly … sincere about running for mayor of this town. Such as:

• Gay marriage for everyone. Even those who still claim they are straight, but have this picture of me hanging above their bed.
•  Repealing NYC’s smoking ban — both indoors and outdoors — and providing every man, woman and child with a fine Cuban cigar.
• Speaking of Cubans, I will personally see to it that Marc Cuban will never be able to set foot in any of the five boroughs again, if I am elected mayor. He will get the Mets over my dead body … and that’s a promise.
• Phone hacking will be a crime punishable by the death penalty.
• To save time and money in our court system, all custody cases will now grant automatic favor to the parent who is more culturally relevant.
• I also plan to have New Yorkers subscribe to China’s infamous “One male child per family” policy. Even if those Communists were never able to go through with it, I firmly believe that adding extra male siblings into a family will bring shame and dishonor onto a household.
• The New Yorker’s “Shouts and Murmurs” section will henceforth be replaced by editorials from the Huffington Post. (Take that, Steve Martin.)

Now that you have heard some of the ways I plan to better this glorious city of ours, I hope you will take me, Alec Baldwin, as a serious Democratic contender for public office. One day, I plan to be president of the United States, and I will not forget the little people who helped me start on the path to WINNING.

Just kidding. But please be advised, I will be making several Charlie Sheen jokes next season on “30 Rock.” I would ask that the responsibility for those lines fall on the writers and not me, Alec Baldwin. I am just a humble servant of the people, albeit one who is enormously wealthy, very handsome and in no way is going to let that bastard Harvey Levin ruin this one for me.

Prepare the guillotines, my friends. Baldwin is back.

3. Meta viral roundup of the day: Comedians Gabe Delahaye and Max Silvestri talk about all the great Internet videos you missed this week as part of their new Internet video series, “Gabe & Max Like the Internet.“

4. Spoilers of the day: Thanks for ruining “Super 8,” marketing people behind “Super 8.”

5. Alec Baldwin tweet of the day:

Yeah, I guess that sums it up. (Not really.)

In a Huffington Post piece this afternoon, Baldwin gave his own take on Weiner’s habit of forming destructive online relationships:

My thought on Weiner is that he is a very busy man. Like most, although not all, politicians, he probably spends a great deal of time going to meetings, raising campaign funds and seizing upon every opportunity to remind people of how great he is as a public servant and a human being. It’s exhausting. He exists under a constant pressure cooker of self-analysis and public appraisal. Like other politicians, he needs something to take the edge off. For some people, regardless of occupation, that could mean booze, drugs, gambling, food or shopping. For high functioning men like Weiner and other officials who have lived through such scandals, who are constantly on the go, that leaves one tried and true source of a reliable high. The affirmation that comes when someone lets you know they want to sleep with you. Or even cyber-sleep with you. This is sex for many people now. …

Weiner is the modern, high functioning man. The fact that he is married is just one, albeit a huge, factor. I know many people who divorce over such issues of online betrayal. Appointment sex with your spouse doesn’t always arrive when you need it most. A modern cell phone, loaded with contacts of willing fellow players, [is] ready for you at virtually any time.

His conclusion: ”Weiner is a modern human being. So he ensnared himself in things that modern humans do. When I first heard about his problems, I snickered and made jokes, too. Now, I’m sad for him, his family, his district and his colleagues. Let he who is without sin…..”

Shortly after posting the column, Balwin tweeted: “What I have offered on HuffPo is an explanation of, not an excuse for Weiner’s behavior. Big difference.” Seconds later he added: “A lot, a real lot, of sanctimonious d-bags on HuffPo.”

Meanwhile, Amy Poehler isn’t the only cast member of “Parks and Recreation” keeping herself in the spotlight. While the comedian is off giving speeches at Harvard, her costar Nick Offerman (who plays her boss and meat-lover Ron Swanson) has been wooing Oprah to come play his first ex-wife next season.  As he told the Huffington Post:

“I think Oprah would be the only, she’s the only person we can think of that might be intimidating to Megan Mullally. It would be so good.”

He then added, “I can assure you if it’s not Oprah, I will quit.”

And while that’s doubtful, Oprah should actually consider it. She did cameo on “30 Rock,” so it’s only fair.

Rounding out the news cycle is Danny Pudi, who plays Abed on “Community.” Anyone who still thinks that show isn’t being taken seriously should check out Variety right now, where “Abed” has been given a column in-character for Emmy season. He’s predicting who will win the awards based solely on his extensive knowledge of television and film (despite never having seen the shows in question), as well as his more savant-like tendencies:

I sort the last four into two groups: a) shows that have won an Emmy, so it seems like they’ll win again, and b) shows that haven’t won yet, so it seems like their turn. Sorting every winner since “I Love Lucy” in 1953:

 B A B B A B A B B AA B B AB B A A B B AA A B A A B B A B B A B AB                              A A B B A A A A B B B B B B A B B A A B

The “ABBA” pattern emerges soon and repeats often, as people’s urge to shake up a system always results in systemic shaking. I totally get it: I once missed a week of school by trying not to touch my chin 7,000 times. The stretches of non-ABBA you see are “cable scares,” like when we just kept giving Emmys to “Frasier” until “Larry Sanders” went away. Think of TV as Rain Man getting through HBO’s smoke alarm by chanting “I like the guy from Cheers.”

The whole article is amazing, and by far my favorite post-finale offering from an NBC comedy actor. Then again, I’m a little biased.