DCP Responds to Getting "Fired" from the Review

[_Doctor Scratch]

Narrator:

It sounds like you know some of the details of what led up to this. Would you be willing to share what you know?

Forgive me if I have come across as being privy to particular first-hand information. Rather, I am just piecing together a few years of second-hand whispers and conversations. It's what happens when you are in close and regular discussion with the many many players involved with attempting to expand the field.

No---that's what I meant. I was just curious what you knew about the backstory. You might not want to say, though, and that's fine.

[_lostindc]

Narrator:

It sounds like you know some of the details of what led up to this. Would you be willing to share what you know?

Forgive me if I have come across as being privy to particular first-hand information. Rather, I am just piecing together a few years of second-hand whispers and conversations. It's what happens when you are in close and regular discussion with the many many players involved with attempting to expand the field.

narrator,

You talk an awful bunch of trash in regards to academia. Likewise, you seem to have no problem taking personal swipes at DCP. Has DCP wronged you in some way?

Also, quit talking about fighting, we all have seen you (video from some conference) and realize you are not a fighter in any way whatsoever. You just sound silly and desperate, like you are climbing out of a locker after getting stuffed in...

[_Yong Xi]

Rollo, according to Dan's word here,

And let's not pretend that the delay in this issue of the Review, or the slowness with which recent issues have appeared, is the justification for this move. You've never raised the matter with me before. In fact, your own actions have significantly contributed to the delay of this most recent issue. (It's substantially complete, though, and the Institute owes my associate editors the proper fees for their services. It's no fault of theirs that you're spiking this issue.)

, the issue, as he states is "substantially complete".

It also is poor form that Brandford never mentioned delays as an issue before.

It sounds to me like Branford was simply going to pull this issue completely, make the announcement, and then proceed to have the new editor and associate editors put together a new review with the new direction in mind. If he had never bothered to tell Dan that delays were a problem, how would Dan have known? And to do all of this while Dan was out of the country was just rotten.

Just rotten or smart? It was likely done this way because of Dan's overbearing ego. Besides, email and phones do exist in Israel.

No doubt this had been brewing for some time and the conditions were ripe. His j-lo gaffe certainly didn't precipitate this, but it made it more doable. When you let someone go, you can find all kinds of reasons to support your decision. I also believe Bradford would not have done this had he not believed he had higher level support.

[_the narrator]

narrator,

You talk an awful bunch of trash in regards to academia.

Probably because academia is an ugly thing that constantly makes me wonder why I desire to remain involved in it.

Likewise, you seem to have no problem taking personal swipes at DCP. Has DCP wronged you in some way?

Dan and I have had our differences played out here and there. I don't think I have taken personal swipes at him, rather I have been critical of his apologetics, politics, and editorial role of the Review (which earned me an editorial of the Review specifically and erroneously responding to me). I used to consider Dan a friend and still like him personally--though if his apologetics and politics are an inherent part of his being, then I guess that is up to debate.

Also, quit talking about fighting, we all have seen you (video from some conference) and realize you are not a fighter in any way whatsoever. You just sound silly and desperate, like you are climbing out of a locker after getting stuffed in...

I have said nothing about fighting. In fact, I would probably get my butt whooped in a fight--despite the numerous Jackie Chan and Jet Li movies I have seen. Rather I'm honest with my thoughts and say what is on my mind (which my wife is assured will get me killed some day because of my likelihood of being whooped in a brawl.

[_the narrator]

No---that's what I meant. I was just curious what you knew about the backstory. You might not want to say, though, and that's fine.

The main elements of the backstory are no secret.

1) Bradford wants the MI to be involved in the scholarly Mormon studies discussions.

2) Most of the scholars involved in Mormon studies (especially the new generation of scholars) have found Peterson's apologetics and the MSR to be an embarrassment and a joke.

Putting these two together is much simpler than appealing to conspiracies involving John Dehlin, The Brethren (TM), the well-being of the Church, and a nun with a wooden leg.

[_moksha]

Bradford's no idiot here. He's a scholar.

Has this coup actually happened? I would have thought Dr. Peterson was indispensable to BYU. Back when Dr. Peterson was called on to testify in the Brian David Mitchell court case I assumed that he had achieved the status of a BYU icon, just a few degrees of glory removed from Coach LaVell Edwards. Most veterans of the trenches are regarded as heros and maintained on feeding tubes as long as possible.

Do you think Dr. Bradford read the Midgley review on Grant Palmer and said, "What the H-E-double hockey sticks is something like this doing in an academic journal?" Was there an equivalent article in the current issue?

[_the narrator]

Bradford's no idiot here. He's a scholar.

I would have thought Dr. Peterson was indispensable to BYU.

Dan is still at BYU. Still has his same pseudo-tenure professorship. Still has same pay. Still has this and that. He's just not the editor of the MSR. Journal's generally have a pretty quick rotation of editors anyways.

[_harmony]

Journal's generally have a pretty quick rotation of editors anyways.

That was my first reaction. That he's been editor for 2 decades is somewhat rare, and removing him in favor of going a different direction seems ... well... not necessarily personal, but rather a simple managerial decision based on a different agenda.

The reaction seems over the top.

[_Kishkumen]

My mother was ward chorister for many years, because she was the only person with musical training in vocal performance. Then a high school chorus teacher moved into the ward and lobbied the bishopric for the position. This stuff happens.

[_Kishkumen]

That was my first reaction. That he's been editor for 2 decades is somewhat rare, and removing him in favor of going a different direction seems ... well... not necessarily personal, but rather a simple managerial decision based on a different agenda.

The reaction seems over the top.

That's because these guys were still living in the Jack Welch cottage industry slampologist days. They didn't realize they were living in the past and the present caught up with them.