What I want to focus on here, though, is something Wallace said about media coverage of these manuscripts. First, let me set this up with one of Hewitt's questions and Wallace's answer:
HH: Wow. Now in terms of, for the lay audience, Professor Daniel Wallace, the significance of this work when it appears, how would you grade it, with an A being a Dead Sea Scroll sort of significance, and you know, flunking, it just doesn’t matter?
DW: I would grade it at least an A, maybe an A+.
And here's what Wallace said later:
At first, I thought well, gee, this news is going to get out. But there wasn’t much of a reaction after the first day or two. But it’s interesting to see that the interest in this, it has gone viral. It’s gone global. But what’s fascinating is you’re one of the few people that’s actually contacted me about it.
Wallace mentions that interest has "gone viral" and is "global", but how much and among what sources?
Imagine how much more the media would be going after this story if it were about, say, movies, sports, or politics. Think of the coverage received by Michael Jackson's death, the Super Bowl, a hurricane in Florida, etc. And it's not just the media. The general public doesn't have much interest in subjects like what Hewitt and Wallace discussed, and they don't know much about the issues involved. What a pathetic reflection on our society.