I would prefer to read the study and judge it by its arguments. Given that I don't smoke, and that I believe people can smoke if they want to, and given that I haven't formerly smoked nor do I plan on smoking, and that I don't spend time every day making fun of or questioning tobacco companies, I really wouldn't be too interested in the study in the first place. Additionally, your example doesn't really parallel the Turley book.
Your answer is disingenuous. Any person with half a brain in his/her head would immediately recognize the conflict of interest and apply analytical skepticism to the study.
DCP admitted, on this thread, that if serious evidence were uncovered that proved that BY ordered the attack, that it would cast serious doubt on his calling as prophet. I'm sure the leaders of the LDS church agree with that assessment. The LDS church has an explicit agenda, which is to increase belief in the LDS church in order to help people attain salvation and exaltation. Two apostles have recently stated that true facts that could prove detrimental to faith ought not to be shared, and, in fact, any faithful historian who chose to share those facts would have his/her own salvation at risk.
The LDS church funded this book. The authors are employees of the LDS church. The LDS church has a vested interest in the outcome. Apparently two apostles reviewed the text before its publications.
This is as clear a case of conflict of interest as the aforementioned tobacco study, and the fact that you provided an extremely disingenuous answer to the my tobacco example proves that you know it's a clear case of conflict of interest.
Once again, this statement does not mean that the text is inaccurate, any more than it would mean the tobacco study would be inaccurate. What it does mean is buyer beware.