I like that academia checks itself, has a certain checks and balances in its constituency.
I agree that What we call Postmodern is set in such a misunderstanding of actual Postmodern ideas that abuse of academic and general legitimate scholarly work becomes more allowable. It is exactly the misreading, and thus misapplication of Postmodern texts that open the door for legitimized general nonsense. Both sides actually function, then, to reflect how what is reasonable and scholarly has become merely what appears to be or otherwise uses the ‘correct signage’ of supposed ‘academic rigor’. It really begs the question of the whole of the institution, in my opinion at least.