WORLD's response to Zondervan's ethics charges

| The Editors

I) WORLD's reporting was professional, careful, internally consistent, thoroughly documented, and verified by the fact that 10 weeks after the story was first released, Zondervan, IBS, and CBT—after denying the existence of any firm plans to change the NIV—have conspicuously reversed course and abandoned those plans. (See IBS's press release) Challenges to the story have been sloppy, contradictory, off the point, constantly changing, and not credible to large segments of the Christian public. This controversy highlights the distinction between two types of EPA members, journalists and public-relations officials. The intense interest in this story by the Christian public is a special reminder that whereas public-relations officials work for their companies or organizations, journalists work for their readers. Many times, as in this case, those loyalties come into conflict. While we regard these ethics charges as baseless, the members of the ethics committee have before them a historic decision: they have the power to promote independent Christian journalism or to stifle it. That these charges are even seriously being entertained by the EPA creates a chilling effect against reports that may not please powerful organizations.