WORLD's response to IBS's ethics charges

| The Editors

To the extent that the International Bible Society's (IBS) formal ethics charges with the Evangelical Press Association echo those submitted by Zondervan Publishing House (ZPH), WORLD magazine's response may be repetitive. IBS, however, employs some different arguments to support charges similar to those of ZPH and makes new charges altogether. WORLD first responds principially, then point-by-point:

I) WORLD states once again that its 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—conspicuously reversed course and abandoned those plans. (See the IBS press release below.) IBS's challenge to the stories is fallacious, poorly stated, and even more inflammatory than what it claims WORLD has been. This controversy highlights the distinction between two types of EPA members, journalists and public-relations officials.