Recognizing that the pandemic is mostly over and that thankfully civility, mutual respect, a sense of humor, and a desire to exchange ideas is back, Shelf Awareness is proud to announce an occasional series that will investigate and discuss some of the most pressing, difficult, controversial issues in bookselling and the book world. But with a special sensitivity, we are experimenting with a new system that skirts words, phrases, or concepts that might be upsetting, so that readers can avoid being triggered. Herewith our first installment of the series:
For some time, debate has raged concerning XXXXXXX . Proponents say that XXXXXX is necessary for the healthy functioning of the industry and has a long tradition that has bolstered XXXX, which of course is essential to the XXXXxx of XXXXXXX. Opponents retort that XXXX leads the industry into murky waters and avoids addressing the problem of XXXXXX. They argue, too, that historically XXXX has been used by XXXX to XXXXXX and to XXCCCXX, making a mockery of its premises.
Several important groups have weighed in on the controversy. XXXX says it respects XXXX but calls for some revision of some aspects of it, particularly where it states XAAXXX AAA XXX. XXXX of XXXX has noted, too, that XXXXXX is key to a fundamental understanding of XXXX. On the other hand, XXXX, president of XXXX, has stressed that XXXX allows for a flexibility that can meet the varying circumstances of real-life situations and not wind up in rigid approaches that cause even more damage. XXXX of the international branch of XXXX notes that outside the U.S., XXXX has been successfully instituted through judicious use of XXXX.
In conclusion, XXXX YYY ZZZZ AAAABBB.
We invite your comments and opinions. Please send them in confidence to XXXX@@shelf-awareness.com.