http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,381063,00.html

The fact that this made national news is laughable, let alone being the cover story on foxnews.com. So in the same thought at the original post title, is this really fit to print? Is there nothing else more important to report in the world today?

-Allen

To get back to the thread: I think that this shows (i.e. Signature’s comments) how some people feel the necessity to reach out and latch onto anything even remotely linked to their topic or subject matter to try and prove their point. It would be laughable, if it wasn’t so pitiful.

Way to get ‘em where it hurts — spelling errors! Yeah, FAIR! You show Signature Books just how superior your are in every regard! Yeah!

Given that Allen is an editor in his day job, such things probably stand out to him. (I know whereof I speak, having felt the sting of the red pen….)

But, I note you failed to mention all the other errors and oversights in Signature’s “news” item:

* They oversimplify what “faithful” members have said and believed about the origin of Amerindians (shades of Southerton, who apparently still hasn’t got it–but, this isn’t surprising, since his whole thesis depends on there being one and only one “Mormon” view of the issue).
* They claim Meldrum has “the backing” of Mormon bishops. What is such backing? How would we know? Does his own bishop “back” him? It isn’t petty to ask for evidence. I’ve seen no e-mails from any Church leader that were favorable toward Meldrum. While some may exist, I would like to see them.
* They claim Wyatt ridiculded Meldrum. Again, evidence? Can anyone show any ridicule from Wyatt or FAIR’s article?
* Failure to engage Card’s article, and dismiss it as merely a ’screed.’

This couldn’t have anything to do with how Card characterized Signature in the past, could it?

Signature [Books] is an anti–Mormon publisher that covers itself the way Playboy has traditionally covered its pornography, by publishing a few articles by serious writers in every issue…By publishing a few books that meet standards of respectable scholarship on LDS topics, Signature gives the false impression that they are a “balanced” publisher, when in fact their unrelenting agenda is to publish books designed to shake the foundations of the Mormon religion. Their prey is the budding Mormon intellectual who takes pride in being smart and educated but does not yet have the critical skills to recognize manipulation and deception when they are masked in the forms of scholarship. - Orson Scott Card to Louis Midgley, 14 April 2004. A copy of this letter can be found in the Papers of Louis C. Midgley (MSS 2806), in the L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah; cited in Louis Midgley, “The Signature Books Saga,” FARMS Review 16:1 (2004): 361–406.

Are these trivial points, unworthy of mention? If not, why focus merely on the (introductory) issues of spelling and fact checking? You wouldn’t want to ignore the meat of the issue you imply Wyatt didn’t mention, would you?

Signature and its authors like to portray themselves as somehow speaking the “objective” (or “functionally objective”) truth about Mormonism. Yet, their standards here don’t seem particularly high.

Which I don’t find surprising, but I do find funny.

Greg

Even more interesting, though, is your response’s snarkiness:

“Way to get ‘em where it hurts — spelling errors! Yeah, FAIR! You show Signature Books just how superior your are in every regard! Yeah!”

Aren’t you stooping as well, then?

BHodges, shouldn’t we all expect more from not only Signature Books, but also FAIR? I’m not defending Signature’s news blurb at all, but nor do I find it necessary to cheer on FAIR in their equally ridiculous response.